Alternative invertebrate protein as a

source for animal feed.

Implications and Constraints towards sustainable
protein recycling.

By:
Edward Diehl
Georgios Valsamakis
Iris van der Veen
Koen Merkus
Lorenza Pasca Di Magliano
Sean Sauren
Wouter Jager
Team number: 1461
Coach: Huub Oude Vrielink
October--December 2014
Alternative invertebrate protein as
a source for animal feed.
Implications and Constraints towards sustainable protein recycling.

“This report (product) is produced by students of Wageningen University as part of their MSc-
programme. It is not an official publication of Wageningen University or Wageningen UR and the
content herein does not represent any formal position or representation by Wageningen University.“

“Dit rapport is gemaakt door studenten van Wageningen Universiteit als onderdeel van hun MSc-
opleiding. Het is géén officiele publicatie van Wageningen Universiteit of Wageningen UR.
Wageningen Universiteit neemt middels dit rapport geen formele positie in, noch representeert het
haar visie of mening in deze.“

“ Copyright © 2014 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed
in any form of by any means, without the prior consent of the authors.“

“Copyright © 20## Alle rechten voorbehouden. Niets uit deze publicatie mag worden verveelvoudigd
of openbaar gemaakt worden, in enige vorm of op enige wijze, zonder voorafgaande schriftelijke
toestemming van de auteurs.”
Executive summary
The increasing world population and wealth, mainly in developing countries, result in a higher
demand for food. The pressure on the available resources induces a challenge for the food
production, particularly in meat. The required increase of animal feed is faced with a limited
availability of fish meal due to marine overexploitation and of soybean and rapeseed due to a lack of
available land. This means alternatives are required to substitute the limiting conventional food
sources, especially with regards to the protein content they possess. The rising prices of the
conventional protein sources of soybean, fish and rapeseed meal create a need for sustainable
alternative solutions.

Several other organisms, such as insects and other invertebrates, have been proposed as
alternative protein sources for animal feed. This paper evaluates the potential use of insects
considering several nutritional, biological and behavioral advantages that they can provide. Among
others, the high nutritional quality, fast reproduction rate, sustainability of their production, feed
conversion efficacy and the possibility to rear them on waste streams are some of the reasons that
make insects appealing for this purpose.

With the main focus on the protein quality, insects have shown potential for substituting or even
completely replacing conventional feed sources. Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins and
essential amino acids are those that cannot be synthesized by the animal themselves. Livestock
animals require several amino acids in their feed for optimal growth and the ratios of those essential
amino acid requirements differ among the different livestock animals, pets and fish species. Lysine is
considered the most limiting and most expensive amino acid for these animals although there is
variation between the needs of livestock species.

Literature provides numerous studies with regards to chemical composition of the insect species
and their nutritional value. The selection of candidate insect species is obtained through a sequence
of criteria that need to be fulfilled. Firstly, for every species, the housing conditions and the
possibility of mass-rearing are investigated. Thereafter, the quality of the protein in terms of amino
acid profile is investigated and in the case of a promising profile potential health risks are addressed
with regards to the specific insect species. Lastly, the feasibility to rear this species on different types
of waste or other substrates is examined.

After evaluating the most promising species, the amino acid profiles of 18 insect species are
compared with those of the conventional feed sources and required amino acid profiles for animal
feeds. The comparison is done by calculating the Essential Amino Acid Index (EAAI) with respect to
lysine levels both from insect and animal requirement perspective. For this calculation, the lowest
insect amino acid values are compared to the highest requirements in feed so the results are
purposely underestimated and the Index values can only be better in reality. According to this
evaluation, the most promising species are termites, field and Mormon cricket, housefly, Turkestan
cockroach, lesser mealworm and black soldier fly.

This study concludes that it is unlikely that a single insect species is able to offer balanced amino
acid profile after being reared on waste without any health risks. It is clear that the chemical
composition of insects is highly dependent on the substrate that is being reared on. Thus, it is
unlikely for insects reared on waste to yield protein of high quality. When the aim of a large scale
insect farm is high quality protein, optimal diets should be used for every species to obtain balanced
amino acid composition. Furthermore, mixtures of proteins from different insect species may assist
in creating balanced diets, suitable for different feed requirements.

As a side research, the EAAI was calculated for 7 earthworm species that showed considerable
potential both in replacing conventional protein sources and meeting the livestock’s requirements.
Despite the favorable amino acid profiles, there is variation between the species, with Lumbricus
rubellus being the most promising one. The fact that earthworms are capable of accumulating heavy
metals in their body and are currently being used for soil remediation comprises dangers that cannot
be ignored. In addition, since these species were studied to a lesser extent, any solid advice for the
use of earthworms in animal feed would be unreasonable and rather superficial.

The findings on legislation indicate that the regulations that are mentioned are often unclear
whether they apply for insects and especially for earthworms. Currently, there are no clear
regulations on the mass rearing of earthworms for the use of alternative protein source. To a certain
extent, there are regulations that can be related to the large scale rearing of insects in Europe,
though they are often perceived to be unclear. To produce Processed Animal Proteins, producers
have to meet the Animal By-Products Regulation. It is at this moment only allowed to include
hydrolyzed proteins in animal feed, on the condition the insects are fed with 100% vegetable feed,
which includes eggs and dairy. Furthermore, it is allowed to feed non-ruminants with fish meal and
to feed aquaculture with non-ruminant processed animal proteins. Currently stakeholders are
attempting to convince the European Commission to change the law so that insects fed with meat
can be used in animal feed as well and Company A can participate in the several initiatives such as
PROteINSECT to strive for favorable regulations. In Africa there are no legislations prohibiting the
breeding and use of insects in feed and in China the regulations allow companies to produce dried
and crushed insects and defatted insect powder as long as the insects do not affect human health,
making these regions attractive to start a rearing facility for Company A.

The research and analysis on competitors indicates that, though there are already several
competitors at this introductory phase, there is room for more insect breeders. A total of 21
companies have been analyzed both inside and outside Europe that are investing in new rearing
facilities, breeding different kind of insect species at different development stages, conducting
research and that in the form of cooperatives or initiatives are supporting to put forth a change in
legislation.

The communication strategies that present insects as food and feed are researched to see how
the many stakeholders attempt to stimulate the development of the industry. Many companies and
research institutes such as universities frequently communicate on the developments in the industry
of insects as feed on their websites, in (research) articles and papers, books and presentations such
as conferences. The communication channels that were used to stimulate consumers’ interest in the
inclusion of insects in their diets mainly consist of the stakeholders’ websites, newspaper articles,
social media, blogs and restaurants’ marketing. All of the communication channels for food and feed
mainly depicted pictures of insects as food and videos of insects both as food and feed. Several of
these channels can be used by Company A for the communication on their products and industry and
several examples that are described in the research can be used as a source of inspiration.

Further research to investigate the potential of the introduction of earthworms in animal feed is
required in order to draw well-founded conclusions. A change in legislation is needed to remove the
current barriers for insect breeding and processing in several regions of the world. To assess the
visibility of large-scale insect rearing in different regions of the world, research should investigate the
related costs and returns of the production of facilities and the breeding process.
Table of Contents
Executive summary ................................................................................................................................. 3
List of abbreviations ................................................................................................................................ 9
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. 10
Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 11
Chapter 2: Animal requirements ........................................................................................................... 14
The barrel theory............................................................................................................................... 14
AA requirements ............................................................................................................................... 14
Chapter 3: Feedstuffs ............................................................................................................................ 16
Soybean meal .................................................................................................................................... 16
Fish meal............................................................................................................................................ 16
Rapeseed meal .................................................................................................................................. 17
Other feedstuffs ................................................................................................................................ 17
Amino acid analyses .......................................................................................................................... 18
Protein content of Feed .................................................................................................................... 19
Insect meal ........................................................................................................................................ 19
Chapter 4: Insect species ....................................................................................................................... 20
General housing ................................................................................................................................ 20
General health ................................................................................................................................... 21
General waste issues ......................................................................................................................... 22
Blattodea (cockroaches and termites) .............................................................................................. 23
Death’s head cockroach (Blaberus craniifer)................................................................................. 23
Dubia cockroach (Blaptica dubia).................................................................................................. 24
Madagascar hissing cockroach (Gromphadorhina portentosa) .................................................... 25
Six spotted cockroach (Eublaberus distanti) ................................................................................. 26
Turkestan cockroach (Blatta lateralis) .......................................................................................... 27
The Fungus-growing Termite (Macrotermes spp.) ........................................................................ 28
Coleoptera (beetles) .......................................................................................................................... 30
Lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) ................................................................................... 30
Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) ....................................................................................................... 31
Morio worm / superworm (Zophobas morio) ............................................................................... 33
Palm weevil (Rhynchophorus phoenicis) ....................................................................................... 34
Diptera (flies) ..................................................................................................................................... 35
Black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) .............................................................................................. 36
 Blowfly (Lucilia sericata) ................................................................................................................ 39
Face fly (Musca autumnalis).......................................................................................................... 39
Flesh fly (Sarcophaga carnaria) ..................................................................................................... 41
Fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) .............................................................................................. 41
Housefly (Musca domestica) ......................................................................................................... 42
Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths) ................................................................................................. 45
Butterworm / Tebo worm (Chilecomadia moorei) ........................................................................ 45
Silk worm (Bombyx mori) .............................................................................................................. 46
Waxworm (Galleria mellonella)..................................................................................................... 47
Orthoptera (crickets, locusts and katydids) ...................................................................................... 48
Chinese grasshopper (Acrida cinerea) ........................................................................................... 49
False katydid (Microcentrum rhombifolium) ................................................................................. 50
Field cricket (Gryllus testaceus) ..................................................................................................... 50
House cricket (Acheta domesticus) ............................................................................................... 51
Migratory locust (Locusta migratoria) .......................................................................................... 52
Mormon cricket (Anabrus simplex) ............................................................................................... 53
Earthworms and Vermicompost ....................................................................................................... 55
Chapter 5: Results and discussion ......................................................................................................... 58
Insects................................................................................................................................................ 58
Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 61
Earthworms ....................................................................................................................................... 63
Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 64
Chapter 6: Legislation ............................................................................................................................ 65
Legislation_in_the_EU ....................................................................................................................... 65
Facilities ......................................................................................................................................... 65
Processing_the_insects ................................................................................................................. 66
Slaughtering................................................................................................................................... 67
Insect feed ..................................................................................................................................... 67
Future prospects ........................................................................................................................... 69
Legislation_outside_the_EU.............................................................................................................. 70
Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 70
Chapter 7: Competitors ......................................................................................................................... 71
Five forces analysis (M. Porter model) .............................................................................................. 71
Threat of new entrants.................................................................................................................. 71
 Determinants of buyers’ power .................................................................................................... 72
Threats of substitute products (soybean meal, rapeseed meal and fish meal) ............................ 72
Rivalry among existing firms ......................................................................................................... 72
European Scenario ............................................................................................................................ 73
Insect producing companies in the EU .............................................................................................. 74
The Netherlands ............................................................................................................................ 74
Spain .............................................................................................................................................. 80
Portugal ......................................................................................................................................... 81
France ............................................................................................................................................ 82
Germany ........................................................................................................................................ 83
Iceland ........................................................................................................................................... 84
Switzerland .................................................................................................................................... 84
Insect producing companies outside the EU ..................................................................................... 84
South Africa ................................................................................................................................... 85
South America ............................................................................................................................... 86
Cambodia....................................................................................................................................... 87
United States ................................................................................................................................. 88
Canada ........................................................................................................................................... 91
China .............................................................................................................................................. 93
Conclusions........................................................................................................................................ 93
Chapter 8: Communication ................................................................................................................... 93
Consumer acceptance ....................................................................................................................... 94
Consumer interest ............................................................................................................................. 94
Stakeholders’ communication on insects in food and feed .............................................................. 95
Communication types ................................................................................................................... 96
Company communication on insect feed...................................................................................... 99
Company communication on insect food ................................................................................... 101
Chapter 9: Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 107
References ........................................................................................................................................... 108
List of abbreviations
Arg = Arginine
CF = Crude Fat
CP = Crude Protein
EAAI = Essential Amino Acid Index
His = Histidine
Iso = Isoleucine
Leu = Leucine
Lys = Lysine
Met = Methionine
Phe = Phenylalanine
Thr = Threonine
Try = Tryptophan
Val = Valine
Abstract
In order to achieve global food security for the increasing world population and the consequently
increasing demand in meat, alternative protein sources are required. Insects possess specific
characteristics that are suitable to replace conventional protein sources such as soybean, rapeseed
meal and fish meal, enabling insect rearing as a potential solution. Although there is a substantial
amount of literature on the protein quality of several insect species, the fit with the livestock protein
requirements is studied to a limited extent. This project was aimed to analyze various insect species
that are capable of being reared on large scale by examining the compatibility of their amino acid
profiles to the requirements of multiple types of animal feed. The current legislation on the mass
rearing of insects was also researched. Evaluating housing, amino acid profile, possible health issues
and substrates of 18 insect species, 3 of which in different developmental stages, of the orders
Blattodea (5), Coleoptera (4), Diptera (3), Lepidoptera (2) and Orthoptera (4). Overall, the amount of
crude protein in insect meal and in particular the amount of the most limiting amino acid, lysine, is
higher compared to that in soybean meal and lower compared to fish meal. Different substrates
influence the amino acid composition of these organisms. As a side research the same analysis was
conducted for 7 earthworm species. With the exception of aquaculture, the use of insect proteins in
animal feed is not allowed in Europe, whereas in African countries or in China there are no
prohibiting regulations. In this paper communication methods used by the major players in the insect
industry are included alongside with future prospects of large scale use of insect products as animal
feed.
Chapter 1:: Introduction
The growing world population requires an increased food production, putting heavy pressure on
already limited resources, such as water and arable land (Rosegrant
Rosegrant and Cline, 2003).
2003 Increasing
economic welfare in developing countries further increases the demand for protein-rich
protein food
sources, such as meat (Davis
Davis et al., 1999).
1999 Consequently, there is a global increase in meat
production to accommodate these demands.
dema

This imposes problems on the animal feed production to find sufficient feed ingredients, in which
protein content is the most important part. Currently, the most-used used protein sources are soybean
meal, fish meal and processed animal proteins (Veldkamp, 2012).. There are several issues limiting
the protein production for animal feed. In the European Union the use of processed animal proteins
is prohibited due to the TSE (Transmissible
( Spongiform Encephalopathy)
ncephalopathy) legislation (Veldkamp,
2012). The soybean and rapeseed cultivation is limited due to a lack of available land (Manceron et
al., 2014).. Fish meal, another source of proteins for feed, has significantly reduced in availability due
to marine overexploitation of the small forage fish which are used for meal (Belluco
Belluco et al., 2013).
2013 In
addition, cattle production and the beef consumption are considered as the major source of the
greenhouse gas emission worldwide. According to Kyoto Protocol on climate change and EU
regulations that followed, there is a need for more sustainable production
production systems with alternative
protein sources (Spiegel
Spiegel et al., 2013).
2013

This growing global scarcity of resources has doubled the prices of high-protein
high protein ingredients for feed
in the last five years; these prices already represent 60-70 % of the total production costs. Alternative
protein sources are urgently needed to fulfill this ever-growing need (Taheripour
Taheripour et al., 2013).

Fig. 1 Prices of important protein feed ingredients, LEI, 2013.

Insects provide an excellent alternative for the current protein sources in animal feed. Many animal
species such as poultry, pigs,, fish and lizards are entomophagous (Bodenheimer,
Bodenheimer, 1951),
1951 which means
they eat insects.. People throughout the world have also been supplementing their diets with insects
forr centuries, due to their nature as an alternative for meat (Bodenheimer,
Bodenheimer, 1951).
1951 However, most
people in Western countries remain skeptical
s ical about using insects as a source of food,
food as they are
often perceived to be unsanitary and might be less skeptical
eptical when insects are used as feed.
Fig. 2 Crude protein content of different insects species compared to SBM, (van der Poel, 2013).. Mw = mealworm; LMw =
lesser mealworm, MW = morio worm, Hf = housefly, BSF = black soldier fly

Insects can be sustainably reared on organic side streams and waste products (Bodenheimer,
Bodenheimer, 1951).
1951
Additionally they have a favorable feed conversion efficiency, as they are cold-blooded
cold and have
energy-conserving lifestyles (Veldkamp,
Veldkamp, 2012).
2012

There are roughly 1300 edible insect species that are able to be incorporated into feed (Veldkamp,
2012).. Some species and/or their larvae are detritivores, which makes it possible to rear them on
almost any substrate including manure and other waste; refining and concentrating leftover protein
and phosphorus (Van
Van Huis et al., 2013).
2013 . Hereby, they reduce manure contamination, waste and the
environmental footprint.

Waste streams are a large source of raw materials, which is increasingly researched in order to be
reclaimed (Veldkamp, 2012). One of this projects aims is to look into the possibility of reintroducing
wasted organic materials into the food cycle. These organic materials will be recovered from e.g.
restaurants and supermarket chains, where products that have spoiled or have gone past their
expiration date are usually thrown away. Instead of simply discarding the waste material by sending
it to a waste site, it can be used to feed insects, which can grow on organic waste and can
subsequently be processed into livestock feed and pet food.
foo . An additional advantage is that insects
can also contain high amounts of fats and large numbers of minerals, which would be a good addition
to the produced feed.

Rearing insects on human feces does promote the risk of disease transmission from insects to t
humans or the risks that insects contract diseases themselves. Diseases that reduce protein
production in the reared insects can be an important factor as well. Researching the diseases that
can pose a problem and creating precautions to prevent primary infection or spreading of the disease
is also important.

The situation of the industry,, namely the competitive, legislative and communicative framework, at
the current stage, create the market where selected species should be introduced.
introduce The industry of
insect
sect rearing companies is really new and not well-structured yet,, however the dynamic
environment of a promising market allows the entry of new companies.. This study does not address
any cost-benefit analysis that is essential for the entry of such an insect farm in the market due to
large amount of variables involved in the analysis.

This project was aimed at illustrating the high potential of shifting from the conventional protein
sources (soybean, rapeseed and fish meal) to insects as a novel protein source for feed production.
This benefit may be increased, considering that some insect species are capable of feeding and
thriving on waste that would otherwise constitute a cost for society. It has been shown that the
production of housefly larvae is more sustainable when compared to fish meal in terms of energy
and land use. When compared with soybean meal, energy use for the production of housefly larvae
meal was a bit higher, but soybean meal requires more than double the amount of land for
production of one kg of protein (van Zanten et al., 2014).

In addition, this project was aimed at providing advice on ways to communicate insects as a protein
source to the general public. Final customers play an important role in the project because they are
the ones that are going to buy the final product. As such, appropriate communication should be
planned to involve the general public in this problem, explaining to them the nutritional properties of
insects (part of the feed) and the impact of an insect farm in the food chain with the linked benefits.

Due to confidentiality, this project refrained from using any information that can reveal the identity
of the company that has ordered this project or anything that might indicate involvement by the
aforementioned company. In this paper the company was referred to as Company A.

The main aim was to generate a list of the most promising insect species to be incorporated into
feed, based on different aspects. This includes their housing conditions, amino acid profiles, ability to
be reared on waste streams, health issues and other features and characteristics that are important
for every insect species.
Chapter 2:: Animal requirements

The barrel theory

Proteins are built up out of 20 different amino acids; among these amino acids are some that animals
cannot synthesize on their own and these must be supplied in their feed (Baker,
Baker, 1997;
1997 Wilson, 2002).
These are the essential amino acids. Efficient diets should contain sufficient essential amino acids to
meet an animal’s requirements (Baker, 1997).. In most animal species lysine is the most limiting
amino acid, therefore all other essential amino acid requirements will be calculated relative to lysine
(Baker, 1997; Wilson, 2002).

Animal feed is formulated using linear programming, to optimize nutritional value while minimizing
costs (Baker, 1997; De Blas and Mateos, 2010). 2010 When an essential amino acid is missing, the
efficiency of the entire feed is limited to the level of the insufficient amino acid (Baker, 1997). The
barrel theory is used to visualize this principle (Wilson, 2002). Imagining a wooden barrel, the lengths
of the staves should be equal in order to contain a maximal amount of water. However when one
stave is shorter than the others, the barrel will overflow if you try to fill it up to the highest stave. In
the barrel theory each stave represents a different amino acid and the lengths of the staves
represent the levels of each amino acid (Wilson, 2002).. The length of each stave is determined by the
feedstuff used and the type of animal to which it will be fed. The growth capacity of a certain type of
feed is limited by the shortestt stave (Wilson, 2002). Excess supply of essential amino acids above the
“water level” will not be used for growth and are consumed as an inefficient energy source (Tuitoek
et al., 1997).. The nitrogen of these amino acids will be excreted in the form of ammonia and nitrous
oxide (Wilson, 2002).

Supplementing the most limiting amino acid reduces the level of excess of the other amino acids,
increasing the growth capacity of the feed (Fig.
( 3) (Tuitoek et al., 1997).

Fig. 3 Illustration of the barrel theory,, adapted from ajinomoto-aan.com.

AA requirements
The amino acid requirements of animals depend greatly on their state of growth and their ability to
synthesize amino acids. For example cattle are able to synthesize most amino acids through the use
of the bacteria in their rumen (Lobley et al., 1980). Most other animals do not have this ability and
need the essential amino acids supplied in their feed. The amino acid contents supplied in current
animal feeds are shown below in table 1.

Table 1 Amino acid contents of various types of animal feed.

Species CP Arg Cys His Ile Leu Lys Met Phe Thr TSSA Trp Val

Broiler 230 14.7 9.1 13.6 6.2 8.4 9.4 - 10.3

Layer 150 9.0 5.9 6.9 3.4 5.0 5.6 1.4 7.0

Turkey 280 16.0 11.0 16.0 5.5 10 10.5 2.6 12.0

Pigs 380 4.0 14.1 7.1 13.3 22.1 22.1 6.6 15.5 4.2 15.0

Channel catfish 240 10.0 12.0 4.8 6.0 1.2

Chinook salmon 400 24.0 20.0 9.0 16.0 2.0

Common Carp 385 17.0 22.0 15.0 12.0 3.0

Nile tilapia 300 12.0 12.0 6.0

Dog 225 10.0 4.4 7.1 12.9 9.0 3.5 8.3 10.4 2.0 6.8

Cat 260 10.4 3.1 5.2 12.4 8.3 2.0 4.2 7.3 1.6 6.2

References: (Baker, 1997; Coon and Zhang, 1999; Cowey, 1994; Dozier et al., 2008; Halver and Hardy, 2002; Leeson and Summers,
2009; NRC, 1994; Veevoedertabel, 2000; Wilson, 2002)
Chapter 3: Feedstuffs

Soybean meal
Soybean meal is the co-product of the solvent extraction of soybean oil (Sauvant et al., 2002). During
the extraction process the soybeans are cracked, heated, flaked and the oil is extracted (Beckel et al.,
1948). To eliminate the solvent, the flakes are dried, toasted and ground (Brown et al., 2008).
Sometimes soybeans are dehulled and at the end of the process the hulls may be added back onto
the soybeans (Salunkhe, 1992).

Soybean meal needs to be heated to eliminate remaining solvents and to deactivate anti-nutritional
factors, such as trypsin inhibitors and lectin, as incomplete deactivation has an impact on its
performance in animals (Brown et al., 2008). However, when the meal is heated at an overly high
temperature, the availability of lysine and (in all probability) other amino acids is decreased (Brown
et al., 2008; Evans and Butts, 1948).

The digestibility of the amino acids in soybean is relatively high; up to 90 %, significantly higher
compared to other oilseed protein sources (Brown et al., 2008). Soybean is the leading oilseed
worldwide with more than 57 % of protein coming from this source (Salunkhe, 1992) and is mostly
used in poultry diets (Giri et al., 2014).

The price of soybean meal ranges between 41,70-47 euros/100 kg and are rising (van der Poel, 2013).

Table 2 Crude protein content of soybean meal.

CP CF Arg His Ile Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Trp Val

516 25 32.5 16.0 25.8 40.3 32.0 10.3 26.8 20.1 25.8

(NRC, 1994; Veevoedertabel, 2000)

Fish meal
Fish meal is defined as the product obtained by processing whole fish or parts of fish from which part
of the oil may have been removed and to which fish solubles may have been re-added (McDonald,
2002). Of all fish meal, 90 % is produced from oily species such as anchovy and capelin (McDonald,
2002). The fish are cooked with steam and the heat coagulates the proteins, liberating water and oil.
The fish meal is produced by pressing the cooked mass and then drying the remaining substance.
Over-drying of the meal significantly reduces the quality of the product as reactive lysine is reduced
(McDonald, 2002).

The quantity and quality of the protein may vary widely, depending on the species of fish used and
the content of secondary products from the fish-processing industry (!!! INVALID CITATION !!!;
McDonald, 2002). The protein content may vary between 500-750 g/kg dry matter. The composition
of the protein is relatively constant despite this variation. Concentrating the protein also
concentrates the dioxins and heavy metals already in the fish (Tacon, 1993).

Fish meal still contains relatively high amounts of fat, mostly unsaturated fatty acids, which makes
them difficult to store and may negatively affect smell, taste and appearance of the livestock
products such as a fishy taint in the meat or eggs (Butler and Fenwick, 1984).
The digestibility of fish meal is 69-70 %, characterized by high lysine content and metal trace
elements (McDonald, 2002). Fish meal is an excellent protein source in pig and broiler feed
(McDonald, 2002).

The price of fish meal is around 110 euro/100kg, but have been decreasing recently (van der Poel,
2013).

Table 3 Crude protein content of fish meal.

CP CF Arg His Ile Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Trp Val

710 92 32.0 24.1 34.1 50.4 52.5 13.5 24.9 28.4 35.5

(Veevoedertabel, 2000)

Rapeseed meal
Rapeseed meal is processed in a similar way to soybean meal (Bell, 1984). It is, however, lower in
crude protein, but high in digestibility (NRC, 1994). Rapeseed meal is high in anti-nutritional factors
which affect palatability and gives a fishy taint to eggs (Bell, 1984).

The price of rapeseed meal is 26,70 euros/100 kg (van der Poel, 2013).

Table 4 Crude protein content of rapeseed meal.

CP CF Arg His Ile Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Trp Val

343 105 19.8 10.7 14.9 24.2 19.1 7.1 13.1 15.1 18.8

(NRC, 1994; Veevoedertabel, 2000)

Other feedstuffs
There are a few other possible protein sources to be used in feed. The first one is a novel protein
source composed of duckweed. Duckweed has a crude protein content of 250-300 g/kg dry matter,
with a price comparable to that of rapeseed meal (Spiegel et al., 2013). The two following options are
prohibited in the EU, but are allowed in other parts of the world.
Feather meal, made from processed (hydrolyzed) feathers from poultry slaughter, has a crude
protein content of 860 g/kg dry matter, with a price between 12-22 euros/100 kg (Agrahari and
Wadhwa, 2010; Chor et al., 2013; van der Poel, 2013). Feather meal is rich in cysteine but low in
lysine (Chor et al., 2013). Meat meal, which is a product obtained by grinding, heating and drying
whole or parts of warm-blooded animals (Kong et al., 2014). The protein content is highly variable,
there is no standard amino acid profile and the price is between 27-44 euros/100kg (van der Poel,
2013). Shrimp head meal is the final option, which is a by-product of the shrimp industry. The main
problem of shrimp meal is that it strongly depends on its origin if it is allowed to be used in the EU
(Mian et al., 2014). It has a crude protein content of 400 g/kg dry matter, with a relatively high
amount of lysine (Mian et al., 2014). Prices vary depending on the season (van der Poel, 2013).
Shrimp head meal has one major similarity with insect meal, which is the chitin content (Khempaka
et al., 2011). For shrimp meal, it has been suggested that fermentation will reduce the chitin content
(Khempaka et al., 2011).

Amino acid analyses

Amino acids (AA) are the organic building blocks of a protein and are composed of an amino (-NH2)
group, an acid (COOH) group and a ‘rest’ side chain that varies per amino acid. The optimal
composition of amino acids in feed is crucial for the growth of livestock, fish and pets. In order to
gain an overview of the nutritional value of an insect of interest, amino acid profiles were obtained.
These profiles contain information on the levels of amino acids, crude protein per kg of insect dry
weight. In addition, the values of crude fat were obtained if possible. Due to the large scale on which
Company A is planning to rear insects, all amino acid and protein levels are expressed in g per kg dry
matter.

A common modern method for detecting the levels of all amino acids in a protein is High
Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) (Dhillon et al., 2014). The mixture to be analyzed is run
through a column with a liquid structure and the different components are then separated on
particle size and measured using a spectrophotometric detector (13903, 2005). By using HPLC
different levels of amino acids in a protein can be measured and an amino acid profile can be
obtained. These profiles are accurate to a certain extent, as often a part of the protein is destroyed
during the analysis. The protein recovery rate, which is calculated as the sum of the weight of all
amino acids, ammonia and taurine divided by the total weight of crude protein (Finke, 2002),
functions as an indicator of the reliability of the amino acid profile. Due to the fact that the recovery
rates were not found for every amino acid profiles, these were not taken into account.

Since essential amino acids cannot be synthesized by the animals themselves, information on the
amino acid levels in insects is of high interest to feed producers. The advantage of obtaining AA
profiles per insect is that through aligning these profiles with the requirements that are set for the
livestock, differences in amino acid levels between insects can be compared relatively easily. Only
the essential amino acids (histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine,
tryptophan and valine) together with the conditionally essential arginine, are taken into account
during this project.

Amino acid profiles can also be used to calculate the compatibility between the amino acid profile of
a specific insect species and the nutritional requirements of feed using the essential amino acid index
(EAAI) (Smith, 2010). It can furthermore be used to compare the amino acid profiles of insects
against those of conventional protein sources. The formula with which the EAAI value is calculated is
x
defined as EAAI = √(
)(etc. for (x-1) EAA’s). In this formula the
reference protein describes either the protein from a conventional source or the protein required by
a specific type of animal feed (e.g. soybean meal or pig feed requirements, respectively). The factor
‘x’ is the minimum amount of essential amino acids present in either the insect protein or the
reference protein. An EAAI value of 1 indicates a high similarity between the amino acid profiles of
the insect and the conventional protein source. If the insect offers more amino acid than required by
the animal feed, the EAAI value will be higher than 1. The EAAI value will be lower than 1 when
amino acid levels offered by the insect protein are insufficient.
Protein content of Feed
As feed requires high-protein levels to sustain optimal livestock growth. Currently used ingredients
for animal feed that meet these high-protein requirements are soybean meal, fish meal and
rapeseed meal. With crude protein contents of respectively 49-56 %, 61-77 % and 34 % on a dry
matter basis, soybean meal, fish meal and rapeseed meal are valuable protein sources for animal
feed (CVB, 2007; In: Veldkamp et al., 2012; Spragg and Mailer, 2007 with Newkirk et al., 2003a).

Insect meal
Due to the effects of these protein sources on the environment, the question arises if soybean meal
and fish meal are still the most viable options. With respect to protein content, insects may be
considered a potential candidate protein source for animal feed. Crude protein contents of insects
ranges from 30 % up to 70 % on a dry matter basis (Veldkamp, 2012), which is similar to or higher
than the crude protein content of soybean meal and fish meal. The ability to be reared on waste, the
high space efficiency and the large proportion of insects that can be further processed may
compensate this difference in protein content compared to e.g. fish meal. In conclusion, insects can
be considered as a candidate for an alternative protein source for animal feed.
Chapter 4:: Insect species
In this section 25 insect species are listed that can be considered as candidates for feed ingredients
and 7 earthworm species that can be used for composting. Criteria that were taken into
consideration when assessing their usability were diet (compatibility with waste streams), amino acid
profiles (compatibility with the dietary needs of livestock), possibility
possibility to house and mass-rear
mass in
captivity and susceptibility to diseases they might transfer to humans. In the rest of this chapter
some general housing, health and waste issues are outlined, after which the insect species are
discussed in detail.

General housing
For all species listed below, it is recommended to completely replace the substrate every 3 months at
the very least, to minimize mold formation
f and remove the insect feces.. If mold formation is
detected the substrate should be replaced immediately. Dead
Dead insects should be removed about once
a week, except in the cases of cannibalistic species (e. g. house cricket, Mormon cricket) in which
case the dead insects are a useful contribution to the diet. To prevent the insects from cannibalizing
live individuals
uals or even eating the enclosure (as some species eat plastic), it is recommended to make
sure enough food is present at all times. For many species, this results in an optimal growth rate
regardless of density.

For most species water can be provided by means

means of drenched cotton attached to drip drinkers, or a
cotton pad in a water dish,, since ‘open’ water is not recommended, as insects may get stuck in the
surface tension and drown. Some species draw all necessary water from their food; if this is the case
it is stated in their housing section.

If any species has trouble molting, or juveniles get stuck or die during a molt, humidity should be
increased, by misting or adding a water source.

It is advised to clean the enclosures as soon as possible when there is an excess of droppings or mold,
or when smells differing from the insects’ or substrates natural smells are detected, as this could
indicate for instance the presence of harmful bacteria. In general, insects produce only a fraction of
the gases of conventional
entional livestock, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5 Gas production of rose beetle, mealworm, dubia cockroach, house cricket and desert locust compared to that of
pigs and cattle (Oonincx et al., 2010)
Methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and ammonia (NH3) are qualified as
greenhouse gases and have a profound negative impact in the environment. In addition ammonia
(NH3) also causes soil acidification. In most cases the five insect species listed in the table produce
less of these than pigs and cattle, making them a more environmentally friendly alternative.

Dust produced by insect enclosures can be a problem as chitin fragments can trigger asthma or other
inflammatory reactions when inhaled (see general health issues) and as such should be minimized.
Dust production is mainly related to relative humidity; more humid enclosures produce less dust. As
most insects require high humidity, dust should not be a problem unless stated otherwise.

Juvenile insects addressed as larvae tend to be less mobile compared to the adults and sometimes
even legless; they will form a pupa in order to emerge in their adult, winged shape, thus going
through complete metamorphosis. This group includes flies, butterflies, moths and beetles.

Juveniles addressed as nymphs are shaped like adults without wings and tend to be more mobile
compared to larvae. Nymphs go through incomplete metamorphosis. The necessity of secure
enclosures will be stated in the housing section. This group includes cockroaches, crickets, locusts
and katydids.

General health
Health is an important aspect of everyday life, this is especially true for humans, but this also holds
true for insects and livestock. It affects an insect’s longevity, its growth rate and whether or not they
can be allowed as food for livestock or humans. There are a number of health issues concerning
insects in general, aside from species-specific issues that will be discussed below. These general
issues concern chitin, a compound commonly found in insects, allergies to chitin and other
compounds in the insect and the capability of insects to carry disease.

Chitin, a compound found in every insect (making up about 2 % of an insect’s dry mass), is a long-
chain polymer of an N-acetylglucosamine, is derived from glucose and is the second most common
organic compound after glucose. Chitin has been shown to have both pro- and anti-inflammatory
effects in animal models. If chitin is eaten, it is known to inhibit the Th2 inflammatory response
(which underlies conditions such as asthma and eczema). If chitin is inhaled and reaches the lungs,
the opposite happens and a Th2 inflammatory reaction is triggered (Ober and Chupp, 2009). High
concentrations of chitin have been linked to an increase in occurrence of asthma. This reaction holds
true for mice as well, as research shows that when they are exposed to high doses of chitin through
their lungs, IL-4 accumulates in the tissue. This indicates an asthma-like reaction (Reese et al., 2007).
It is therefore recommended that animals are not fed with feed derived from insects in a powdered
form, but in other forms that cannot be inhaled, such as pellets.

Besides these issues, chitin derivatives have various other aspects. Chitin is known to inhibit cancer,
but only in a very specific chitin/chitosan mix. Additionally, certain derivatives are known to be non-
allergenic and non-toxic, non-biodegradable and biocompatible to humans. This means that a
number of prosthetics such as artificial skin, contact lenses and surgical stitches are made from these
derivatives.

In humans, allergies to crustaceans and house dust mite have already been proven to be able to
cross-react to food containing yellow mealworm proteins (Verhoeckx et al., 2014). Workers that are
often in contact with insects, like producers of live fish bait, were shown to have sensitization to the
live fish bait made of for instance mealworms and wax worms (Siracusa et al., 2003). This means that
further study into the effects of insect meal on the target livestock’s immune system would be
advisable, specifically if allergic reactions of animals that are fed insect meal are highly prevalent or
exceptional in occurrence.

As insects are known as vectors for disease, this is another important health issue. Various insect
species are capable of transferring pathogens or parasites from one host to another, through a
variety of mechanisms, the most prominent of these being blood-feeding behavior. Because of their
need for blood as a substrate, especially as a protein source for breeding females, no blood-feeding
insects were included in the list of insects that can be bred for protein production purposes. The
second reason why blood-feeding insects are excluded from the list is their capability to carry a
variety of deadly diseases. Their exclusion eliminates a lot of the major health risks associated with
insects, like malaria, dengue, yellow fever and many others, but does leave insects that are capable
of storing pathogens in their intestinal tract, regurgitating and/or defecating a pathogen. This is the
only other way to spread disease from waste to insects and from the insects back into the food and
feed cycle, while the insect remains infective for longer than a day or two.

Insects can also spread disease as a mechanical vector; insects that come into contact with a surface
infected with a pathogen can contract the pathogen temporarily, as it can adhere to the insects’
exoskeleton for a while. If a pathogen harmful to the animal it will be fed to or to humans is present
in the intestinal tract at the time of harvesting the protein meal, it can pose a problem. However,
often enough these pathogens cannot survive for long periods in the intestine of the insects and die
after a while.

Proper storage of the insect meal is vital, as any improperly stored food rich in proteins is a breeding
ground for pathogens. There are quite some steps that can be taken to reduce or eliminate
pathogenic microorganisms, but the effect of these steps on the final product has not been tested
yet.

A few methods to reduce microorganisms in the insect meal are refrigeration at 5 to 7 °C, boiling in
water or vinegar, or drying. In general, insect meal storage should have its own legislation with
regards to proper storage, drying, freeze drying, heat treatment and processing of the feed. A
balance between safety, product quality and the acceptable loss of nutritional value should be found
(Klunder et al., 2012).

General waste issues

To examine the possibility of using insect species to bio convert organic waste streams, there are
certain aspects and life history traits that should be taken into account. Characteristics such as size,
fecundity, duration of larval development, larval and adult diet, pest status, adaptability to mass
rearing and other behavioral characteristics such as mating and specific habits for oviposition should
be considered when selecting a suitable insect species for bioconversion (Čičková et al., 2014).
Therefore, for every described insect species it is addressed how well it is able to grow on waste.
Blattodea (cockroaches and termites)
Cockroaches are a group of insects with a worldwide distribution which is considered for use for feed
as they are generally omnivorous and many of the species can thrive virtually anywhere. Most
species are nocturnal, but just as active during the day when disturbed.

This insect group undergoes incomplete metamorphosis, as they are hemimetabolous. As such, the
nymphs look like smaller, wingless versions of the adults; growth is continuous. Juveniles do not have
to be kept separate from the adults; in some species it has even been shown that juveniles grow
better when around adults. Adults are recommended as a feed ingredient as they are the largest and
richest in nutrients. The adults can fly, but most species virtually never do so.

Concerning odors and gases, certain cockroaches produce methane and this is the case for every
cockroach discussed below, so the use of cockroaches in large scale breeding facilities should take
this into account and provide ways to prevent methane accumulation in rearing facilities. The level of
methane production of a cockroach is almost three times lower in g/kg body weight than the amount
a cow produces.

Disease often comes to mind when cockroaches are mentioned and not without reason. Cockroaches
in general are known to naturally be able to carry the following harmful diseases: Clostridium
perfringens, Escherichia coli, Mycobacterium leprae, Pasteurella pestis, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, a
number of Salmonella species, Shigella alkalescens, S. paradysenteriae and Staphylococcus spp.
(Baumholtz et al., 1997). It should be considered, though, that in order to carry these bacteria they
must first come into contact with contaminated material. The substrate and the cockroaches
themselves should be regularly screened for harmful diseases.

Death’s head cockroach (Blaberus craniifer)

Housing
The death’s head cockroach is a tropical species from Central America. For optimal growth this
species should be housed at 25-30 °C, at 65-85 % humidity and a light cycle of 12 hours light. The
cockroaches can be fed with fruit and vegetable waste and water can be provided by means of
drenched cotton. It is advised to leave their molts, as these are rich in calcium and are usually eaten.
Some form of shelter should be provided for the cockroaches to hide in as this reduces stress and
enhances growth.

This species is fast and a good climber, so the enclosures should be secure. The cockroaches do not
usually fly, but both sexes do have functional wings.

This species is a slow breeder compared to most other cockroaches (Pets, 2014); if they are not
breeding, it is recommended to increase food quality, temperature and/or humidity if they are not
yet at their advised maximum. It is advised to keep small colonies of 3-5 individuals to increase
breeding success. Females bear up to 35 live young 3-4 weeks after copulation (Buatois and Croze,
1991). The nymphs will burrow and hideaway for the first 1-2 weeks of their life, but they can be
housed together with the adults without trouble. Nymphs mature in 4-5 months and their total life
can last a year (WAZA, 2014).
Amino acid profile
The death’s head cockroach has a particularly high nutritional value due to the high crude protein.
The amino acid profile of the death’s head cockroach is relatively unfavorable, as the levels of lysine
are lower than required for most feed types. EAAI values higher than 1 were furthermore only found
for dog and cat feed.

Table 6 Essential Amino acid composition for adults of the Death’s head cockroach in g/kg of dry matter

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Trp Val

adult 650 220 25.3 29.9 24.0 38.3 30.5 7.8 17.5 20.1 39.6

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
There are not many specific health issues concerning the death’s head cockroach, but it has been
found to be able to carry Salmonella enteritidis for up to 17 days after ingestion and S. typhosa for
one day after ingestion (Krieg et al., 1959). This is in addition to what has already been mentioned
under general health and under the general information for all cockroaches.

Waste
As this species can be reared on fruit and vegetables, it can also be reared on fruit and vegetable
waste; the food does not need to be extremely fresh.

Conclusion
The death’s head cockroach is relatively easy to feed and care for, but as it breeds relatively slowly
and is rather fast and skittish, it may not be the best possible cockroach species to keep in captivity.
This species does have a high fat content, so this fact, together with the slight problems in housing it,
makes it less than ideal. Additionally, the death’s head cockroach shows low levels of essential amino
acids and consequently does not meet animal feed requirements. With regards to health,
cockroaches in general and this includes the death’s head cockroach, are also not without problems.
Overall, this species is may be considered not promising as an alternative protein source.

Dubia cockroach (Blaptica dubia)

Housing
The Dubia cockroach is native to Central and South America. For optimal growth this cockroach
should be kept at 25-30 °C with at least 60 % humidity; if the nymphs have trouble molting, moisture
levels should be increased. Dubia cockroaches have been shown to prefer and grow best on food
with a composition of mainly protein and fiber with only around 4 % fat. They will accept grains,
bread, fruit and vegetable waste. As a tropical species, this cockroach thrives with a long day light
cycle of 16 hours light (Alamer, 2013). It is suggested to rear nymphs in the presence of adults in
crowded conditions, as this seems to result in maximal growth combined with maximal adult size
(DubiaRoachDepot, 2014).

Adults are easy to sex as males have wings and are smaller; neither sex can climb smooth surfaces
(glass or plastic) or jump. No specific conditions are required for breeding, but it is suggested to
provide the animals with some form of shelter. Egg cases contain 20-35 eggs and are carried by the
female for one month before hatching; nymphs will mature in 3-5 months. The adult can live on for
up to two years.

Amino acid profile

As shown in Table 7, the Dubia cockroach shows a high crude protein content, which is desirable for
an alternative protein source. However, the relatively high fat content reduces the Dubia’s potential
as an alternative protein source for animal feed. The potential of the Dubia cockroach is further
reduced by its low lysine content. Like the death’s head cockroach, the Dubia cockroach only meets
the amino acid requirements for a limited number of animal feeds.

Table 7 Essential amino acid composition of Dubia cockroaches (females) shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Trp Val

adult 644.0 245.0 22.5 29.0 20.6 34.1 25.8 8.4 17.4 20.0 34.8

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
No health risks that are specific to this species when compared to the general cockroach population
are known, they are however still subject to what has been said regarding the general health
information and the general information on the cockroach.

Waste
The Dubia cockroach is omnivorous, but grows best on an almost completely herbivorous diet,
preferring to eat very little protein. Grains, bread, fruit and vegetable waste are readily accepted.

Conclusion
This cockroach is a nutritionally rich, fast-breeding species that can be kept under crowded
conditions and does not climb. As such it is promising as a feed ingredient. The unusual light cycle
could pose problems as their lamps will have to be programmed differently from the regular 12:12
cycle, but the cockroaches will still grow and breed at 12:12 at a suboptimal rate. These cockroaches
are also relatively safe to rear with regards to health and they consume everything, but especially
plant waste. The low lysine content of the Dubia cockroach is a drawback. All in all, this cockroach is a
little to moderately promising as an alternative protein source.

Madagascar hissing cockroach (Gromphadorhina portentosa)

Housing
This tropical cockroach is a highly social species which will establish a hierarchy within its enclosure.
Males display aggression towards other males which might waste energy and cause them to take in
more food, so the amount of males in a single enclosure is recommended to be minimized (Carrel
and Tanner, 2002). Small colonies of 3-5 cockroaches have been shown to yield the best breeding
results, but higher numbers are possible; nymphs can be kept together with adults. The species may
hiss when handled as a defensive display, but this is harmless.

Optimally, the species is kept at 23-26 °C and around 30 % humidity, with a light cycle of 12 hours
light. They can climb glass, so enclosures should be secured. Water should be provided via soaked
cotton.
The females bear 20-50 live young after a gestation period of two months. Under optimal
circumstances the nymphs can mature in three months. The adults can live for two or three years,
having two or three broods a year.

Amino acid profile

There is no information readily available on the amino acid profile of the Madagascar hissing
cockroach, however, their crude protein and crude fat content are both high (Oonincx and
Dierenfeld, 2012).

Health
No health risks that are specific to this species when compared to the general cockroach population
are known, they are however still subject to what has been said of general health and the general
information of the cockroach.

Waste
This cockroach’s diet can include oats, fruits and vegetables, as well as meat waste, but gravid
females should especially be provided with food containing animal protein for optimal egg
development.

Conclusion
This cockroach is more complicated to house than most due to the males’ territorial behavior, but
aside from that it is a promising species. The females are live-bearing and the young are able to grow
well in the presence of adults. This allows for easy grouping and housing and the species’ omnivory
makes it capable to be reared on most types of waste. It is also not associated with any additional
health risks. However, their amino acid profile is still unknown and a definite conclusion on its
eligibility cannot be made without this information.

Six spotted cockroach (Eublaberus distanti)

Housing
The six spotted cockroach is a tropical, cave-dwelling species. For optimal growth and reproduction,
the cockroaches should be kept at 24-26 °C and 60 % humidity and 6-7 cm of substrate for
burrowing. This species can be reared on most types of fruit and vegetable waste, supplemented
with at least some animal protein, otherwise they will turn to cannibalism.

As both male and female adults are winged, enclosures should be secure, even though flying and
climbing is rare. Females are live-bearing and it is recommended to keep the enclosures crowded, as
this species seems more inclined to mate in higher concentrations. An adult can live for one to two
years.

Amino acid profile

The six spotted cockroach is high in crude protein and iron (Barker et al., 1998). The high fat content
furthermore reduces its potential to be processed in animal feed. This cockroach species meets the
lysine levels of 50 % of the analyzed feeds. Overall, the EEAI values are low for the six spotted
cockroach.

Table 8 Essential amino acid composition of the Six spotted cockroach shown in g/kg of dry matter.
Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adult 663 251 23.9 28.5 22.5 35.8 28.5 8.6 17.2 20.6 37.1

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
There are no health risks specifically related to this species when compared to what is known of the
general cockroach population, they are however still subject to what has been said of general health
and the general information on the cockroach.

Waste
With a wide variety of substrates it can feed on, the six spotted cockroach is a good candidate
species. Additionally, it has been proposed that crowding for some cockroach species, including E.
distanti, is promoted by waste recycling of their own cadavers (Rychtar et al., 2014). In other words,
the dead cockroaches of the group create a valuable high-nutrient resource for the survivors. This is
an advantage for the mass-rearing of six spotted cockroach, since dead individuals do not need to be
removed.

Conclusion
This cockroach is promising for mass rearing as it can feed on most types of food waste and thrives
under crowded conditions, is not associated with additional health risks and has a high fat and
protein content. The low EAAI values, however, are a definite drawback.

Turkestan cockroach (Blatta lateralis)

Housing
The Turkestan cockroach is an African-Asian species, mainly active outdoors. To successfully mass-
rear the species, the cockroaches should be kept at 30-35 °C and at least 50 % humidity. Density does
not seem to be an issue; the species can be kept crowded as long as they have enough food. A light
cycle of 12 hours light is recommended.

The sexes can be easily distinguished; males are smaller than females, lighter in color and winged.
The cockroaches do not climb, but males can jump, so enclosures should be secure. For breeding, a
ratio of one male to every three females is suggested to yield optimal reproductive results. No
specific conditions are required for breeding, but it is suggested to provide the animals with some
form of shelter, as this reduces stress.

Egg clutches average 16.8 eggs and hatch rates are estimated at over 80 % (Kim and Rust, 2013).
Nymphs will mature in 3 to 5 months and adults will live for at least 20 months.

This cockroach is a fast-breeding and fast-growing species and thus replaced other cockroach species
as a pet food source. It should be noted that it is currently an invasive species in the United States
(USDA, 1978 and 1980), as such it should be kept well contained.

Amino acid profile

The Turkestan cockroach has a high crude protein rate, which is desirable for an alternative protein
source. The EAAI values are furthermore favorable for every type of feed with the exception of dog
and turkey feed. The relatively high fat content is a drawback.
Table 9 Essential amino acid composition of the Turkestan cockroach shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adult 614.9 323.6 45.3 17.7 25 38.8 41.4 10.8 24.8 25.5 5.37 39.8

(Finke, 2013)

Health
There are not many specific health issues concerning the Turkestan cockroach, but this type of
cockroach is known to be able to carry both drug-resistant and non-drug-resistant strains of
Salmonella spp. salmonella (Devi and Murray, 1991). It should be considered that in order to carry
these diseases the cockroach must first come in contact with contaminated material.

Waste
The diet of both nymphs and adults can include animal manure, fruit and grains (Pets, 2014; Rios and
Honda, 2013), but should be at least supplemented with high-protein foods such as meat waste.

Conclusion
As this species is a fast breeder, high in protein, omnivorous and can be kept crowded, it is one of the
best candidates for mass rearing. Their potential to be an invasive species can be a drawback, but not
if they are kept well contained. Another drawback is that they are known to be able to vector drug-
resistant salmonella, which could cause problems. The EAAI values of this species are average and
lysine requirements of the majority of the analyzed animal feeds were met. Overall the Turkestan
cockroach may be considered a moderately promising species.

The Fungus-growing Termite (Macrotermes spp.)

Housing
Termites are social insects that live in colonies. Taxonomically, they are closely related to
cockroaches, but belong to the separate infraorder of Isoptera.

Termites swarm naturally before the beginning of the rainy season. Swarming is the aggregation of
winged males and females which will leave the colony to reproduce and create a new one. The
reproductive termites of some species are considered a human delicacy in many African countries
(Sogbesan and Ugwumba, 2008). Normally their diet consists of cellulose-based products such as
decaying plants and wood, cotton and other fiber sources or even solid waste such as plastic (Lenz et
al., 2011). Some species have also been associated with dung of herbivorous mammals (Freymann et
al., 2008).

Within the colony, some termite species such as those from the genus Macrotermes spp. live in
symbiosis with a single fungal species, gathering plant material to cultivate this as their food source.
With the fungal activity within the colony, termites are able to feed on complex plant substrates such
as lignocellulose (Nobre and Aanen, 2012). Colonies of these termite species can be up to several
meters above and belowground.

The termite colonies, even from the same species, can have different architecture due to differences
in the outside colony temperature and the soil type (Wood, 1988). For species of the genus
Macrotermes spp. temperature control within the colony is an important factor and is optimal at
about 30 ºC and relatively high humidity because termites are susceptible to desiccation (Wood,
1988). The presence of absorbent materials like clay or carbon paper is important for maintaining
high humidity within the colonies.

Amino acid profile

The following AA profile is a nutrient analysis that was done on termites obtained from a terrarium
during swarm activity for fungus-growing termites (Table 10). As can be observed from the table, the
crude protein and fat content are unfavorably proportioned. This species has the highest EAAI values
in comparison to all other insects and the level of lysine exceeds the requirements for all analyzed
animal feeds. In addition, the levels of lysine also exceed those of soybean meal, fish meal and
rapeseed meal. Based on the amino acid profile the fungus-growing termite is the most promising
insect as an alternative protein source.

Table 10 Essential amino acid composition of the Fungus-growing termite shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

mixed 463 301 36.3 26.5 23.2 32.6 69.7 20.8 39.8 37.3 7.8 38.6

(Sogbesan and Ugwumba, 2008)

Health
It has been shown that Macrotermes subhyalinus can be parasitized by Verticia fasciventris, a blowfly
parasite. It is still unknown when and how the parasitization occurs. If the environment containing
the termites is sealed and no other insects can enter the enclosure, this should not pose a problem
(Neoh and Lee, 2011). These termites have not been associated with any harmful bacteria and it is
unknown whether they are capable of carrying the diseases mentioned under the general cockroach
header.

Waste
Most termite species literally live within their food source (Lenz et al., 2011). They are capable of
feeding on organic waste, such as leaves and branches from different tree species, cardboard and
other paper waste products (Lenz et al., 2011). Thus, they are potential decomposers of solid organic
waste, but they do require additional nutritious food in their diet if they are meant for mass
production as a feed supplement (Lenz et al., 2011). Strict association with dung removal has been
observed in some species only under naturally occurring conditions (Freymann et al., 2008).

In addition, little is known about collection methods for this species. In most studies, this was done
naturally during swarming (Sogbesan & Ugwumba, 2003) or by the use of electric light as an
attractant and a water trap to immobilize the insects (Van Huis, 2003).

Conclusion
Termite meal with the amino acid values shown in Table 10 could sufficiently replace 50 % of fish
meal and cover the optimum dietary protein requirements for the fish species Heterobranchus
longifilis (Sogbesan & Ugwumba, 2008). Despite the nutritional value of this insect species, the
biggest obstacle for the use of termites in animal feed is to maintain a termite colony in captivity due
to many unexpected factors that can influence the rearing.
Coleoptera (beetles)
Beetles are the most common type of insect on earth. As a food source the larvae, also known as
grubs, are most common as they are easy to care for and collect. Unlike the adults with a hard
exoskeleton, the larvae are soft-bodied and much easier to process. Listed below are three types of
darkling beetle larvae (family Tenebrionidae), which are one of the most common sources of insect
protein in both the pet trade and the human food chain. The fourth, unrelated species is a weevil
(family Curculionidae).

Beetle larvae can be kept on a layer of their food source and will usually burrow in and through it as
they feed. For all species listed here it is advised to provide water by means of fruit or vegetable
slices. The larval enclosures do not need lids as the larvae cannot climb; they can be kept in lidless
trays. Adult beetles are better climbers and winged and although they rarely fly their enclosures
should still be closed at the top.

Lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus)

Housing
The lesser mealworm occurs almost worldwide, aggregating in grain storages and poultry rearing
facilities. It is considered a pest species, but has also been observed to have a good nutritional value.

For optimal growth, the larvae should be reared at 30-35 °C, at 55 % humidity; no light is needed. The
substrate should be 5-10 cm deep. The larvae do not climb, so they can be kept in lidless trays.

The lesser mealworm’s diet may include grains, vegetables and meat; water can be supplied by
means of fruit (Rice and Lambkin, 2009). Growth rates are shown to be highest when 3-6 larvae are
kept together for every gram of substrate (Rueda and Axtell, 1996).

The adults do not need specific requirements for breeding. The eggs hatch 3-5 days after oviposition
and larvae pupate after ± 35 days. Emergence occurs after 4-6 days and the adults are sexually
mature in 10 days; they can live for up to a month (Rueda and Axtell, 1996).

Amino acid profile

The proportion of crude protein and crude fat is relatively favorable in the lesser mealworm.
Additionally, the high level of lysine, which exceeds lysine levels of soybean and fish meal, is striking.
The lysine level in the lesser mealworm is furthermore higher than required for every type of feed
with the exception of turkey feed. The EAAI values showed to be not particularly high.

Table 11 Essential amino acid composition for the lesser mealworm shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 648.0 222.0 31.1 31.8 29.8 43.4 42.1 8.4 25.3 25.9 38.2

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
Looking into health, the first thing that comes up is that lesser mealworms are proven vectors of a
number of diseases, including Campylobacter jejuni, Salmonella enteric (Hazeleger et al., 2008),
infectious bursal disease virus (McAllister et al., 1995), reovirus, birnavirus, Eimeria sp. (Goodwin
and Waltman, 1996) and Escherichia coli (McAllister et al., 1996). The species is also capable of
carrying Histomonas meleagridis and turkey coronavirus, but is not very susceptible to infection
towards these pathogens and loses its infectivity in a matter of days (Huber et al., 2007; Watson et
al., 2000).

Waste
The lesser mealworm’s natural diet includes grains, fruit, vegetables and meat and as such it can be
reared on these waste streams. However, if fruit is excluded, water should be provided by keeping
the substrate moist.

Conclusion
This species is easy to keep, has a high protein content and as such is promising for mass rearing.
They are a potential host to infectious diseases, but these can be prevented by keeping the
mealworms from coming into contact with contaminated material. The lysine level and EAAI values
of the lesser mealworm are furthermore favorable. Overall, this species may be considered
moderately promising as an alternative protein source.

Feeding trials on turkeys and chickens (DESPINS and AXTELL, 1995) where the soybean meal in their
feed was replaced by lesser mealworm protein already showed great results.

Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor)

Housing
Mealworms have long been a common pest in grain storages and can be very prolific on relatively
low-nutrition food. As such they are a popular feeder insect in the pet trade and are already mass-
reared throughout the world.

For optimal growth, mealworm larvae should be kept at 20-27°C, in sturdy containers (as they have
been shown to eat plastic) with 5-10 cm of substrate. It is advised to keep a light cycle of 12 hours
light. No lid is needed if the walls are smooth and vertical, as the larvae do not climb. Around 50
mealworms can be kept for every kg of substrate.

It has been shown that the speed of larval growth is optimized at higher humidity levels, optimal
weight gain being 68 mg within 12 weeks at 70 % humidity. When humidity is further increased, the
risk of mold formation increases subsequently, but the growth rates of the insect do continue to rise.
However, the virulence of certain entomopathogenic fungi like Beauveria bassiana can be reduced by
raising the temperature above 30 °C (Lee et al., 2014).

It was found that the optimal diet to sustain larval growth with maximum crude protein and fat
content is bran with 10 % yeast (RAMOS-ELORDUY, 2009), but mealworms will readily accept any
type of plant matter and also do well on meat. The larvae can be raised on low-nutrition or dried
food, but a source of moisture should be provided, possibly in the form of fruit or vegetable matter.
The larvae will burrow towards moisture, potentially assisting in the ease of collection.
It is advised to keep the larvae for at least a month before using them as ingredients for feed (Martin
et al., 1976); it will take them ± 10 weeks to pupate. Any pupae should be removed from the larval
container, as the larvae may eat them (Stevens, 1992). After 6-18 days the adults will emerge and
they, in turn, should be removed from the pupae for the same reason. It should be noted that only
about 50 % of beetles survive pupation (Martin et al., 2007). No specific requirements are needed for
copulation and oviposition. Eggs will hatch within 4-19 days. It will take a mealworm at total of ± 4
months to develop into an egg-laying adult (LUDWIG, 1956).

Amino acid profile

The mealworm showed a lower crude protein/crude fat ratio than the lesser mealworm. The larvae
showed higher EAAI values and lysine levels than the adults. The lysine levels of the larvae were not
high enough to meet the requirements for pig feed, common carp feed and broiler chicken feed.

Table 12 Essential amino acid composition of (yellow) mealworm shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 490.8 351.7 25.5 15.5 24.7 52.2 26.7 6.3 17.3 20.2 3.4 28.9

adults 652.9 148.7 28.1 18.7 28.4 53.4 28.9 8.3 17.0 22.3 7.1 41.3

(Finke, 2002)

Health
Mealworms have not been found to carry disease harmful to humans, though a few studies indicate
there might be a connection to the development of asthma (Siracusa et al., 2003), rhinitis or contact
urticaria (Bernstein et al., 1983) when exposed to mealworms or their exoskeletons for prolonged
periods of time .

Waste
Mealworms are able to feed on any type of plant matter and also do well on meat. As such they can
be reared on fruit, vegetable, grain and meat waste, though they should always be provided with
moisture in the form of either fruit or water. If water is added to the substrate, the risk of mold
formation does increase.

Conclusion
Mealworms are a promising and already widely used insect to convert dry and vegetable waste. They
are easy to keep and collect. A drawback could be their cannibalistic tendencies and the subsequent
need to separate larvae, pupae and adults; there is also the possibility of allergic reactions to their
exoskeletons. The EAAI values found for the mealworm adults and larvae are furthermore not
favorable and the lysine levels were not high enough to meet the requirements for multiple types of
feed. Taking the aforementioned factors into account, the mealworm is little promising as an
alternative protein source.
Several feed trials have been done with mealworm proteins. Regarding livestock, mealworms
replaced soybean meal in poultry diets up to 40 % (Ramos-Elorduy et al., 2002) and up to 25 % on
broiler chicks (Schiavone et al., 2014).

With regards to fish trials, literature provides more information. For instance, both live mealworm
larvae and mealworm meal (ground material) successfully replaced up to 80 % of the fish meal in the
diet of African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) without any reduction in its growth or performance (Ng et
al., 2001). In addition, 25 % inclusion of mealworm protein in feed trials did not affect fish weight
gain and performance when fed to gilthead sea bream (Piccolo et al., 2014) and European sea bass
(Gasco et al., 2014a). The acceptable inclusion levels of mealworm protein for rainbow trout was
higher, reaching 50 % of fish meal replacement (Gasco et al., 2014b).

Morio worm / superworm (Zophobas morio)

Housing
The morio worm is a bigger version of the regular mealworm in appearance; it is slightly more
popular in the pet trade as it has a more preferable chitin-body weight ratio.

For optimal growth a colony of larvae should be kept at temperatures of 30-33 °C in their first month
and at 27 °C afterwards, at a low humidity; a piece of fruit is enough as a water source.

Grains, fruit and vegetables are a suitable diet and substrate; depths of 7-10 cm are optimal for
burrowing. The larvae are photophobic, so they should be kept in dark or shaded conditions; light
can be used to prevent escape if necessary. Optimal rearing densities are 12-15 larvae per cm2 in the
first month, 3-9 in the second month, 3-6 in the third and fourth and 3 in the fifth (ChinaPapers,
2010)

It is recommended to isolate larvae, pupae and adults from one another, as they tend to cannibalize
more immobile individuals, but also to isolate larvae in order to allow them to pupate, as they do not
seem to do so readily while surrounded by other larvae. It is recommended to place these larvae in a
dark enclosure at temperatures of 24-26 °C. Adults should also be isolated from each other to allow
them to breed. They should be well fed; if they are not breeding, more fruit and vegetables are
required.

Once a month the adults should be removed from their enclosure and the remaining substrate
should be kept moist in order to allow the eggs to develop. When the larvae emerge, a new larval
enclosure can be set up (Herpcenter, 2014)

Eggs will take 7-14 days to hatch, larvae will take 150-200 days to mature and about 10 days to
emerge from their pupae and adults can live up to 4 months. The eggs develop fastest at 27 °C.
Pupation is optimal at 10-15 °C; higher temperatures cause higher mortality.

Amino acid profile

The morio worm showed a low crude protein / crude fat content and moderate lysine levels. This
species is not able to meet the required lysine levels for pig, broiler chicken and common carp feed.
The EAAI values were furthermore not particularly high.

Table 13 Essential amino acid composition for the Morio worm shown in g/kg of dry matter.
Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

Larvae 470.0 396.0 21.6 22.6 23.5 33.8 24.9 7.5 17.4 19.3 30.6

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
Not many pathogens have been specifically correlated with the morio worm, but it is susceptible to
the bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Huadong et al., 2012).

Waste
Morio worms naturally feed on grains, fruit and vegetables, so the corresponding waste streams can
be used as food. In addition, soft, thin, foam-containing plastics can be added to the diet as well if
there is a surplus that needs to be bio converted; growth will still be normal (China Papers, 2010).

Conclusion
The morio worm is a good bio converter for various types of vegetable waste and even plastic; the
only drawback could be the need to separate larvae, pupae and adults and isolate individuals passing
into another stage or breeding. This could also be a benefit of the species, however, as larvae kept
crowded will not pupate and will thus be available as a feed ingredient for longer periods of time.
The EAAI values found for the morio worm were not highly favorable and the lysine levels were too
low to meet the requirements for important feeds, such as broiler chicken and pig feed. Based on
these factors, the morio worm cannot be considered a promising alternative protein source.

Morio worm was fed to Nile tilapia and replaced 25 % of the fishmeal without any advese effects on
the growth and performance of the fish species (Jabir et al., 2014). It is worth mentioning that even
when 100 % replacement occurred, the survival of the fish was unaffected but the growth was
retarded.

Palm weevil (Rhynchophorus phoenicis)

Housing
The African palm weevil is unrelated to the three previous species; instead it belongs to the family
Curculionidae. Palm weevil larvae are a well-known edible species in the tropics and are frequently
included in human diets, but they could just as well be a good ingredient for feed (van Huis et al.,
2013).

In the wild, the larvae feed on the inside of previously damaged palm trees, but experiments with
artificial diets have been done and the larvae have been shown to also accept other types of plant
matter such as oats, sugarcane, coconut, potato and pineapple. Development in all stages was fastest
when larvae were fed on potato and pineapple diets (Kaakeh, 2005). An artificial diet of 57 % oats, 22
% sugar, 11 % molasses, 9 % yeast and 1 % salt has also been developed. Adults can be sustained by
cotton saturated with a sugar or honey solution (Kaakeh et al., 2001).

For optimal growth the larvae should be kept at 24-26 °C and 60-75 % humidity, at a light cycle of 12
hours light. Substrate depth should be 5-10 cm; the larvae do not need secure enclosures as they
cannot climb. Adults should be provided with ventilated lids as they can both climb and fly.
Under optimal circumstances, the larvae take 70-75 days to pupate. The adults take 16-18 days to
emerge and then live for a further 50-60 days. Eggs are deposited around 30 days after copulation,
over a period of another month with 2-3 eggs a day. On the optimal diet for growth, fewest eggs are
deposited; 60-70, compared to 100-200 on oat, palm, sugarcane or artificial diets (Kaakeh, 2005). The
larvae can be kept crowded as long as they have enough food.

Amino acid profile

The palm weevil showed a low crude protein / crude fat rate and low levels of lysine. This species
was only able to meet the required lysine level of channel catfish and cat food. The EAAI levels were
furthermore relatively low.

Table 14 Essential amino acid composition for larvae of the palm weevil shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

Larvae 220.6 666.1 11.2 7.6 7.6 13.7 8.8 4.5 9.1 6.8 5.5 6.2

(Ekpo)

Health
The palm weevil has not formally been recognized as a vector for diseases. A field study done in
Nigeria, however, showed the presence of bacterial species Staphylococcus aureus, E. coli,
Enterococcus faecalis and Pseudomonas aeruginosa and fungal species Aspergillus niger, mucor sp.
and Rhizopus sp. in roasted larva of the palm weevil (Ekrakene and Igeleke, 2007). It should be taken
into account that these pathogens are more likely to be an indicator of unsanitary food preparation
than diseases carried by the weevil, although this cannot be excluded. The pathogens listed above
are relatively common and should not pose a significant threat even if they are carried by the palm
weevil rather than a result of unsanitary preparation.

Waste
Palm weevil larvae prefer the marrow of palm trees, potato or fruit, but it is suggested they can also
be fed on fruit and vegetable waste. The adults can be fed with a sugar solution.

Conclusion
Studies have shown that care for palm weevil larvae is simple. They cannot climb and they can be
kept under crowded conditions, so they are a promising species regarding the types of waste they
will accept. They accept oats, sugarcane, coconut, pineapple and potato in nature and they are likely
to do well on fruit and vegetable waste. It is unlikely there are serious health risks associated with
the species as long as they are reared and processed under sanitary conditions. Their amino acid
profile is not ideal and the lysine levels are too low for the majority of feeds. Therefore, the palm
weevil is not considered as a promising option for mass rearing.

Diptera (flies)
Fly larvae, also known as maggots, are already widely used for manure reduction, but can also be
reared on other waste streams as there are species with different diets like herbivorous (e.g. fruit
fly), omnivorous (e.g. housefly) and carnivorous (e.g. flesh fly) species. They can be kept on a
substrate of their preferred food and will also draw their water from it as long as it is kept moist.
All flies are holometabolous, which means they pupate in order to metamorphose into the adult
version. Most species will leave their food source to pupate, so collection should be easy in the case
where pupae are used as a feed ingredient. The adults are good flyers, so their enclosures should be
secure. Their larvae are legless and in most cases cannot climb even steep inclines, let alone walls, so
their rearing facilities generally do not need lids.

Black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens)

Housing
The black soldier fly (family Stratiomyidae) has been extensively studied for its use in animal feed. It
originates from the tropical and subtropical areas of America, but due to international transportation
in the 1950’s, it has colonized many other places around the world (Makkar et al., 2014). Larvae of
the species are saprotrophs, meaning that they feed on decaying organic matter, including different
types of animal manure.

Black soldier fly larvae should be kept in 15-20 cm of substrate, at 26-35 °C and relative humidity
between 50-70 % (Fatchurochim et al., 1989). If the humidity increases and the substrate gets too
wet, there is the danger of structure loss of the substrate and an inadequate oxygen supply for the
larvae (Barry, 2004). Larvae are photophobic, so they will stay away from the surface. On average,
larvae grow best at densities of 2.5 larvae/cm2 of surface (Sheppard, 1983).

At the last larval stage (prepupae) the larvae stop feeding and migrate towards dry and protected
sites for pupation, potentially assisting in easier collection (Diener et al., 2011). The duration of the
pupal stage can last from several weeks up to 5 months (Diener et al., 2011). A crucial factor for
accelerating the larval stage completion is the presence of a moist pupation substrate, regardless of
the type of substrate (Holmes et al., 2013). Emergence of adults occurs optimally at 26-30 °C at dry
and sheltered conditions, 10-14 days after pupation (Design, 2008). However, the duration of the life
cycle can severely vary from 2 weeks to 4 months and is highly dependent on the rearing conditions
such as temperature and humidity, as well as on the quality and quantity of the substrate (Veldkamp,
2012; Westerman and Bicudo, 2005).

A great advantage of this insect species is that the adults do not have functional mouthparts and
therefore do not require any food, only water. Mating and oviposition occur optimally at 27.5 -37.5
°C and 30-90 % humidity (Tomberlin and Sheppard, 2002). Natural light is required for mating
(Tomberlin and Sheppard, 2002); females have only one oviposition event in their lifetime and lay
their eggs two days after copulation (Tomberlin and Sheppard, 2002). The eggs take 4 days to 3
weeks to hatch, depending on the rearing conditions.

Black soldier flies are not attracted to human food or settlements, so if outbreaks occur they should
not pose any problems (van Huis et al. 2013).

Amino acid profile

The profile of the essential amino acid profile of the black soldier fly is shown in Table 15. Both the
larvae and pupae show moderate lysine levels and EAAI levels. Black soldier flies are also able to
meet the required lysine levels of all feed types with the exception of broiler chicken and common
carp feed. The black soldier fly furthermore showed high crude protein and low crude fat levels.
Table 15 Essential Amino Acid composition of the Black soldier fly larvae and pupae shown in g/kg of dry matter.
CP=Crude Protein, CF=Crude Fat

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 561 128 20.8 24.7 22.4 34.2 30.3 7.9 17.4 20.2 30.9

pupae 521 197 21.9 24.5 21.9 33.9 28.1 8.9 17.2 18.8 29.7

(Bosch et al., 2014)

Health
The black soldier fly is not implicated to play a role in the spread of vector borne diseases, nor is
there much known about diseases that are harmful to the animals themselves. This is because the
adults, with no functional mouthparts, do not ingest contaminated substrates. Additionally, adult
females never lay eggs on decaying organic matter (van Huis et al., 2013). Only one case of human
furuncular myiasis (where larvae burrow under a person’s skin) has ever been shown for black soldier
flies and no additional symptoms presented themselves (Adler and Brancato, 1995).

Waste
Black soldier fly larvae can feed on almost any kind of substrate and it has been experimentally used
in bio converting organic waste or manure into valuable feedstuff (van Huis et al., 2013). Several
rearing methods and substrates have been proposed for the black soldier fly, including poultry
manure (Sheppard et al., 2002), swine manure (Newton et al., 2005), cattle manure (Newton et al.,
2005), food waste (Barry, 2004) or municipal organic waste (Diener et al., 2011). If they are not
reared on manure, the diet should mainly include vegetable food, as meat and fat poses problems
even when making up less than 10 % of the diet. The optimum feeding substrate consists of 50 %
fruit matter and 50 % vegetable matter. It should be noted that the larvae aerate their substrate and
reduce odors (van Huis et al., 2013).

Black soldier fly larvae show good results in biologically converting poultry manure by reducing the
accumulating manure mass by 50 % (Craig Sheppard et al., 1994). When experimentally fed on dairy
manure, BSF development was affected by the decrease in moisture over time and frequent manure
application was needed (Myers et al., 2008).

(Popa and Green, 2012) suggested the implementation of this species for processing organic
biodegradable materials in leachates and in other polluted waste streams with a sustainable
outcome.

Their activity has been shown to reduce E. coli in cattle (Liu et al., 2008) and Salmonella enterica in
chicken manure (Erickson et al., 2004). Larval activity accelerates the reduction of Salmonella spp.
and other zoonotic Enterobacteriaceae in human feces, making BSF a hygienic player when such
treatment residues are used as bio fertilizer in agriculture (Lalander et al., 2013). Further
implementation of a black soldier fly pupae meal in the feed industry requires further processing of
the insects with separation and drying techniques (Lalander et al., 2013).
A full-scale organic waste treatment plant was designed and operated in Costa Rica (Diener et al.,
2009). Within facilities of 500m2, larvae of black soldier fly were able to convert approximately 1.5
ton (wet weight) of organic municipal waste into prepupal protein every day. The harvest of the
prepupae was done by washing them in boiling water and followed by drying before packaging.
About 150 kg of prepupal protein (dry weight) can be harvested on a daily basis (Diener et al., 2009).

When compared to the housefly, black soldier fly larvae and pupae have a longer developmental
time, but they result in much larger and heavier pupae (Tomberlin and Sheppard, 2002). Thus, larger
amounts of waste may be converted into biomass by a single black soldier fly larva (Čičková et al.,
2014). In addition, black soldier flies are considered as competitors and oviposition inhibitors of the
housefly (Musca domestica) because the liquefying of the substrate by the black soldier fly is not
suitable for housefly development (Bradley and Sheppard, 1984).

Conclusion
Overall, the black soldier fly is an insect species that is easy to rear (Tomberlin et al., 2009), grows
fast and in large densities (Diener et al., 2009), survives a wide range of environmental conditions
with low O2 concentration, increased acidity and tolerates high concentrations of toxic products in
its feed (Myers et al., 2008).

When fed to pigs, black soldier fly prepupa meal could replace 100 % of the soybean meal, but only
after the removal of the cuticle in order to reduce the amount of chitin. Without the cuticle removal,
best pig growth was obtained when black soldier protein and soymeal were at a ratio of 1:1 (Newton
et al., 2005). When chickens were fed on proteins of the same species, they had a higher feed
conversion efficiency compared to soybean meal (Newton et al., 2005).

Apart from domestic animals, black soldier fly proteins have also been fed to several fish species. In
most cases, partial replacement of the fish meal by the insect protein sustained good performance
for channel catfish and blue tilapia (Bondari and Sheppard, 1981; Bondari and Sheppard, 1987),
rainbow trout (Sealey et al., 2011; St-Hilaire et al., 2007) and Atlantic salmon (Lock et al., 2014). A 33
% replacement of the fish meal for the juvenile turbot sustained good fish performance, but higher
doses of the insect protein affected fish acceptance due to low digestibility of chitin by this fish
species as this seemed to inhibit the availability of other nutrients (Kroeckel et al., 2012).

To sum up, larvae of this species are capable of feeding on many different organic substrates
suggesting the potential of this insect for the waste management industry and have at the same time
shown great potential in replacing conventional animal feeds. Nevertheless, if the desirable product
is nutritious larvae for animal feed, the substrate should be enhanced with additional nutritious
feedstuff if waste is being used. In contrast, if the objective is obtaining the greatest waste
management and the highest manure reduction, large amounts of manure should be added with
well-distributed inoculated BSF eggs (Myers et al., 2008). In this case, the end-product will be a less
desirable protein for animal feed. Last but not least, in the case of rearing the species for biodiesel
production, high fat content is desired and therefore, oil-rich substrates are needed (Zheng et al.,
2012).
Blowfly (Lucilia sericata)

Housing
Optimally, blowfly larvae are housed at 35 °C (Grassberger and Reiter, 2001) and 70 % humidity, with
a light cycle of 14 hours light (Clark et al., 2006). The larvae are sarcophagous/necrophagous,
meaning that they can be fed with fresh or decomposing meat, however, fresh meat sustains better
larval growth (Smith and Wall, 1997). Apart from cadavers, they have also been associated with
animal dung (Cickova et al., 2014). It is advised to keep approximately 8 larvae per gram of meat for
the optimal growth rate (DANIELS et al., 1991).

Larvae pupate after about a week of feeding and emerge a week after that; adults can live up to 100
days. No special requirements are needed for mating and inbreeding has no effect on activity,
fertility or longevity. Females lay 2,000-3,000 eggs which can hatch in a day under optimal
circumstances (Mackerras, 1933) (Grassberger and Reiter, 2001).

Amino acid profile

When fed on poultry manure, blowfly larvae contained 518 g of crude protein and 325 g of crude fat
per kg of dry matter (Yehuda et al., 2011). In the same study, the amount of protein for blowfly
pupae was 575 g/kg of dry matter and the amount of fat 236 g/kg of dry matter. To the best of our
knowledge, complete amino acid profile for this species has never been described. Nevertheless, the
high protein levels and the waste conversion efficiency make this species a promising candidate for
the purpose of this study.

Health
The blowfly is an ectoparasite of sheep, causing myiasis known as “blow fly strike”, in which the eggs
of the blowfly that have been laid on sheep burrow into the sheep’s skin when they hatch (Rose and
Wall, 2011). Blowflies can be infected with Taenia hydatigena from feces containing the parasite;
when these blowflies die they can be eaten by sheep or other grazers, after which the grazers will be
infected (Lawson and Gemmell, 1990). Lastly, blowflies are known to be able to store Mycobacterium
avium subspecies paratuberculosis, the causative agent for Johne’s Disease, in their gut for more
than 4 days (Fischer et al., 2004).

Waste
Blow fly larvae can be naturally fed on any type of meat waste and manure.

Conclusion
This species is an efficient converter of discarded meat into protein; it grows fast and is easy to keep
and breed, also because of its tolerance for inbreeding. The light cycle can be a problem, but the
larvae also do well at 12:12; albeit not optimally. However, the risk of disease associated with their
diet could pose a more serious problem and thus should be taken into consideration when large-
scale farms are designed.

Face fly (Musca autumnalis)

Housing
For optimal growth, face fly larvae should be kept at 26-28 °C and 50-60 % humidity at a light cycle of
16 hours light (Arends and Wright, 1981).
The larvae can be reared on virtually any type of manure as long as it is moist. Adults, especially
females, require a high-protein diet for optimal fertility and normal egg development (Chaudhury
and Ball, 1973) and will feed on blood in nature. An artificial diet consisting of powdered egg,
powdered milk, sugar and water has been developed (Arends and Wright, 1981).

The larvae will pupate after 10 to 15 days and adults will emerge after 4 to 7 days; the adults live for
23 to 26 days; egg clutches number on average 26 eggs (Teskey, 1969).

Amino acid profile

Face fly pupae show a favorable crude protein/crude fat rate, but did not contain sufficient lysine to
meet the requirements of the majority of feed types. Additionally, the calculated EAAI values were
relatively low.

Table 16 Essential amino acid composition of the Face fly pupae shown in g/kg of dry matter

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

pupae 516.9 113.5 13.0 14.6 19.2 29.4 25.8 13.6 21.9 19.3 ND 23.4

(Čičková et al., 2014)

Health
Face fly presence is strongly associated with a rise in Moraxella bovis infections of cows and a
subsequent rise in cases of infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis (Gerhardt et al., 1982). The face fly
is also a known carrier of eyeworm species Thelazia gulosa, T. lacrymalis, T. rhodesi and T. skrjabini
(Otranto and Traversa, 2005). It is capable of transferring Brucella abortus, the causative agent of
brucellosis (Malta or Crimean fever) for 12 to 72 hours after contact with the bacterium (Cheville et
al., 1989).

Waste
The larvae of the face fly can be reared on fresh poultry, bovine or swine manure; if the manure is
dry, water should be added until the moisture level is 70-80 % (BAY et al., 1969). It is recommended
to rear face flies in a density of around 5,000 larvae per 300 g manure.

Conclusion
The face fly is a promising manure bio converter although it is not recommended for use in animal
feed due to several limiting amino acids of this species. However, experiments where face fly pupae
meal was fed to chickens showed the insect meal was similar to soybean meal and the best chicken
growth was obtained when chickens were fed on a diet with a 1:1 ratio of soybean meal and face fly
larvae meal (Koo et al., 1980). In addition, under mass-rearing conditions, problems can arise due to
the complicated diet of the adults. Another drawback could be the risk of diseases associated with
their food source. The low EAAI values furthermore indicate that face flies are not likely to be a
promising alternative protein source.
Flesh fly (Sarcophaga carnaria)

Housing
Optimally, flesh fly larvae are kept at temperatures of 26-28 °C, with 80 % relative humidity. A light
cycle of 12 hours light is optimal (Yehuda et al., 2011).

The larvae can feed on fresh and decomposing (organ) meat, but will also accept earthworms
(Bänziger and Pape, 2004). The best conversion rates are achieved with around 5,000 larvae per kg of
meat waste for a period of 3-4 days, after which the food medium will be liquefied (Yehuda et al.,
2011). Adults require animal protein for optimal survival (Lamb et al., 1983), but can survive on sugar
and water alone.

The larvae feed for 7 days, then ‘wander’ for ± 5 days without feeding before burrowing into their
food source and pupating; as such, it is recommended to collect them at the start of this phase.
Adults emerge within 20 days of pupation (LEE and DENLINGER, 1985) and after mating the female
will deposit ± 150 live young on a suitable food source.

Amino acid profile

No complete amino acid profile was found for the flesh fly. Nevertheless, one study measured flesh
fly larvae fed on fish waste and obtained 618 g of crude protein and 221 g of crude fat per kg of dry
matter (Yehuda et al., 2011). An analysis on the pupae of this insect species concluded a higher
protein and lower fat content: 652 g and 178 g per kg of dry matter, respectively.

Health
Due to the lack of a complete amino acid profiles for this animal, it was regarded superfluous to
investigate diseases related to the flesh fly.

Waste
As its name suggests, the larvae of the flesh fly can feed on virtually any type of meat waste. If there
is a surplus of earthworms this can also be used as a food source.

Conclusion
Its broad diet makes the flesh fly a promising meat bio converter; the adults’ diet is also relatively
simple. However, since no complete amino acid profile was obtained, no further research on health
aspects was conducted either.

Fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster)

Housing
The fruit fly is commonly used as a model insect in laboratories because of its fast reproduction and
simple genome.

For an optimal growth rate, larvae should be kept at around 29 °C and 70-80 % humidity. Fruit fly
larvae do best when fed on a medium that includes yeast (Sang, 1956) and will feed on decomposing
plant material such as overripe produce and even mushrooms. Under optimal circumstances, the
flies will complete the cycle from egg to adult in 7 days. Larval development can be completed in 4-5
days with an optimal diet. It is advised to keep 10-20 larvae per 250 ml of food; higher larval densities
are associated with a lower adult body weight and fecundity in the long run (Rodriguez, 1989).
No specific requirements are needed for copulation. Females will lay up to 500 eggs in the substrate
or under the skin of fruits. The eggs should be kept at 25 °C and 70 % humidity for optimal survival
(Matthews, 1995). The adults can fly, so enclosures should be secure.

Amino acid profile

No complete amino acid profile was found for the fruit fly.

Health
To the best of our knowledge, Drosophila melanogaster has never been associated with animal
diseases. However, it can serve as a vector for bacterial plant pathogens such as Erwinia carotovora
(Basset et al., 2000).

Waste
Both fruit fly larvae and adults feed on fresh fruit or fruit waste, mushrooms and most produce
containing yeast. It has also been reported that industrial waste leachates can have a toxic effect on
the genome of this species, therefore any association with industrial solid waste is not advised
(Siddique et al., 2005).

Conclusion
This species is easy to keep and feed and grows very quickly. However, collection can be more
difficult compared with most other species due to the small size of the larvae, pupae and adults.
Aside from this, larvae and pupae may be difficult to separate from their substrate and adults are
prone to escaping. In addition, it is considered as a pest in countries in a temperate climate and
therefore the location of a large-scale insect farm for this species should be taken under
consideration due to the probability of escape.

Housefly (Musca domestica)

Housing
Musca domestica (family Muscidae) is the most common fly species and it occurs worldwide. Due to
the ability of the maggots to feed on a broad variety of substrates including manure, it has been
studied as a potential candidate for converting waste streams into a high-protein feed source
(Makkar et al. 2014).

Housefly larvae will grow best with an average of 2.5 individuals per cm2 at substrate depths of 15-20
cm (Morgan and Eby, 1975). They can be reared on meat, fruit and vegetable waste, as well as on
yeast and grains (HOGSETTE, 1992). If their diet includes manure, it should be fresh, as old and
anaerobic manure can be lethal to the larvae. Even aerobic manure of a few days old will cause
slower growth of the larvae (BEARD and SANDS, 1973). Larval development is optimal at 35-38 °C,
although survival is greatest at 17-32 °C. Optimal substrate humidity lies around 50-70 % (Capinera,
2008). The larvae should be reared in total darkness for optimal development (Erens et al., 2012).

Pupation and emergence occur optimally at 32-37 °C; larvae will move to drier locations in order to
pupate, which may assist in easier collection.

Adult houseflies may mature in 4-13 days under optimal circumstances (Capinera, 2008). Optimal
breeding occurs at temperatures of 25-30 °C; adults require food before they mate and females need
protein-rich food in order to produce eggs (Bodnaryk and Morrison, 1966). Oviposition will occur 4-
20 days after copulation, in moist substrate and under dark conditions. The eggs are deposited in
clumps (Miller et al., 1974); adult females lay 500-600 eggs under natural conditions, but this can be
artificially manipulated with more than 2,000 eggs per female under controlled conditions (Makkar et
al., 2014). The eggs need to remain moist during their development and they hatch 8-20 hours after
oviposition. It has been found that manure is optimally reduced (amounts are approximately halved)
when 0.5-1 kg of eggs are added to every kg of fresh manure (Miller et al., 1973).

Amino acid profile

Housefly pupae and adults both showed high crude protein/crude fat rates. Lysine levels were higher
than required for all feed types. In housefly larvae it seems that older age and proximity to pupation
increases their protein content and lowers their fat content (Aniebo and Owen, 2010), so collection
time can be adjusted in views of the desired composition of the end product. Taking into
consideration that adults are richer in protein than larvae, but final-instar larvae weigh more than
adults and thus fewer individuals are needed for one kg of dry matter, a trade-off must be made.

Table 17 Amino acid composition of housefly pupae shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

maggots1 593.0 - 28.7 21.2 22.1 35.3 38.7 14.8 30.9 23.7 8.5 29.0

pupae2 625.0 192.0 26.3 30.0 25.0 38.1 38.8 16.3 32.5 23.8 ND 31.3

adults3 781.7 75.4 48.0 22.7 32.3 49.2 50.0 23.2 31.4 29.9 9.5 43.6
1
(Zuidhof et al., 2003)
2
(Bosch et al., 2014)
3
(Finke, 2013)

Health
The housefly is an important vector for many diseases, partly because both larvae and adults feed on
manure and decaying organic matter. The adults need to liquefy the food before consumption and
do so by regurgitating droplets of saliva, thereby potentially transmitting pathogens (Makkar et al.,
2014). The list of diseases that have been linked to the presence of the housefly is quite extensive; as
such, instead of a comprehensive list, an attempt at summing up the diseases most strongly
connected to the housefly will be made. Reduction of the housefly population was significantly linked
to a reduction of occurrence of both enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli and Shigella in Israel (Cohen et
al., 1991). Enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli (EHEC) has been proven to be spread by the housefly,
most strongly for the first 24 hours after feeding on EHEC contaminated foods (Sasaki et al., 2000).

Another disease spread by the housefly is caused by Campylobacter jejuni; houseflies can pick this
bacterium up, are able to store it for a number of days and have been proven to be able to infect pigs
(Rosef and Kapperud, 1983) and chickens (Shane et al., 1985). Houseflies have also been implicated
to be reservoirs for Salmonella (Olsen and Hammack, 2000) and as a mechanical vector for Vibrio
cholerae (Fotedar, 2001), Cryptosporidium parvum (Graczyk et al., 1999), Newcastle disease virus
(Barin et al., 2010) and Yersinia pseudotuberculosis, which causes Pfeiffer’s disease (Zurek et al.,
2001). Houseflies cultured on fresh fish were found to contain Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas
aeruginosa, Aspergillus tamarii and Bacillus cereus (Banjo et al., 2005). Lastly, houseflies have been
demonstrated to carry metazoan pig parasites like Ascaris suum and Trichuris suis in their gut,
indicating their ability to vector these parasites (Förster et al., 2009)

Waste
Literature provides many experimental designs for housefly bio converting systems. (El Boushy,
1991) described a poultry manure converting system where housefly pupae were fed to broiler
chickens. The system was set up on an experimental scale and the separation method of the pupae
and the manure was obtained through floatation in water. The end product was a mixture of pupae
and manure residues. Such a housefly farm was capable to bio convert 17.5 kg wet chicken manure
which was thereafter inoculated with 52,500 housefly eggs (3000 eggs/ kg). At 35 °C, pupae were
ready to be harvested in a week and fresh manure with new inoculum was needed (El Boushy, 1991).

A more recent study by (Wang et al., 2013) demonstrated the ability of housefly larvae to bio convert
95-120 kg m3 of swine manure into nutritious larvae every week. The end product of this study
yielded larvae containing 569 g of crude protein per kg of dry matter and 238 g of crude fat on a dry
matter basis. Heavy metal accumulation within the larval body was calculated to be below the
“Hygienical Standard for Feeds” (GB 13078-2001) (Wang et al., 2013). Another study by (Zhang et al.,
2012) with the same bio converting system showed that microbial diversity in swine manure was
significantly decreased after housefly larval activity. A similar decrease was shown in the activity of
extracellular enzymes (such as cellulose, proteases and phosphatases), as well as in the bacterial
community structure of the composted manure (Zhang et al., 2012). Although swine manure seems a
nutritional substrate for this species, due to limited aeration, it has been recorded to cause high
larval mortality (Čičková et al., 2013). Adding sawdust or previously processed manure resulted in
higher larval survival due to better aeration, although the nutritional quality of the substrate was
reduced (Čičková et al., 2013; Čičková et al., 2012). The mass-rearing techniques can be further
optimized by an equal dispersal of the housefly eggs into the substrate. By doing this, larvae are able
to utilize and convert the manure more efficiently and competition between the larvae is avoided
(Cickova et al., 2013).

Methods to separate the larvae from the substrate have also been investigated and these methods
are mostly based on insect behavioral responses. (Anthony, 1971) proposed the use of intensive light
in order to separate the larvae from the substrate, but this technique was later re-evaluated due to
high energy demand. A very promising technique for this purpose seems to be oxygen limitation and
accumulation of noxious metabolic products in the substrate (Cicková et al., 2012). Through this
technique, separation success was 74 % on average, although some trays with larvae and manure
ended with more than 90 % separation.

A comparative study on the effect of different livestock manures on the fitness of the housefly
concluded that there is variation in the generation time of this species’ feeding on different
substrates (Khan et al., 2012). The rate of development was faster on poultry, nursing calf and dog
manure, probably due to of the high nitrogen content (Khan et al., 2012). Subsequently, this resulted
in shorter generation time, heavier pupae and females with higher fecundity (a higher number of
eggs) (Khan et al., 2012). In contrast, manure substrates of cow, buffalo, horse, sheep and goat
proved to be poorer in nutritional value for the housefly because of the longer duration time of the
larval stage (Khan et al., 2012).

Conclusion
Housefly larvae can be reared on virtually any type of waste; fresh and decomposing meat, fruit and
vegetables, grains and manure. Their requirements are easily met and they are easily collected after
pupation. Due to the large amount of pathogens, they can contract from their food, microbial control
of a large-scale housefly farm is required.

In most studies, housefly maggots have been successfully included into poultry diets. For instance, in
broiler chicken diets, maggot meal replaced the fish meal completely (10 % of the total diet). Higher
maggot inclusion negatively affected chicken growth and performance and in this case additional
methionine was needed in the broiler diet (Makkar et al., 2014). When maggot meal was fed to
laying hens to replace meat and bone meal, both egg yield and hatch rates were observed to increase
(El Boushy, 1991). Housefly larvae showed great potential in replacing soybean meal in turkey diets
with a very high amino acid digestibility (95 %) (Zuidhof et al., 2003).

Literature also provides numerous studies of fish feed trials and in general housefly maggots could
partially replace fish meal when fed to Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (Ogunji et al., 2008) and the
African catfish Clarias gariepinus (Aniebo et al., 2009) , whiteleg shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei (Cao
et al., 2012) and Chinese white shrimp Fenneropenaeus chinensis (ZHENG et al., 2010).

The EAAI values found for the housefly were reasonably high. The lysine requirements of all analyzed
feeds were met by both housefly adults and pupae. Taking all aspects into account, the housefly may
be considered a moderately promising candidate species.

Lepidoptera (butterflies and moths)

Insects of the order of Lepidoptera undergo complete metamorphosis by means of pupation. Pupae
or larvae (caterpillars) close to pupation are recommended as a feed ingredient, as they are generally
heavier and richer in nutrients compared to the adult.

In the adult form butterflies and moths are generally immediately ready for mating; adults are short-
lived and some species require no food at all.

Caterpillars are quite mobile and capable of climbing glass and all listed butterflies and moths, save
the silk moth, are capable of flight; as such, all containers should have secure lids.

Butterworm / Tebo worm (Chilecomadia moorei)

Housing
The butterworm is the larval stage of the Chilean / Tebo moth (family Cossidae). As it is considered
a major pest, it is not allowed to be reared due to the possibility of an escape. Therefore, the larvae
are radiated to sterilize them prior to shipping them abroad and will not pupate and breed in
captivity (Silva et al., 2009). The species feeds only on the leaves of the Chilean Tebo tree and no
artificial diet has been developed. In the pet trade, they are refrigerated until they are needed as pet
food, so fattening for feed purposes is also currently not recommended.
Amino acid profile
The high content of crude fat (738.7 g/kg DM) of this species makes it good food source for pet
reptiles and other insectivores (Finke, 2013). The crude protein content was found to be 389.5 g/kg
of dry mass. The essential amino acid composition can be seen in Table 18.

Table 18 Essential amino acid composition of the silkworm shown in g/kg of dry matter

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 389.5 738.7 29.4 10.2 16.35 25.37 21.9 6.25 13.74 14.4 3.91 24.4

Finke, 2013

Health
Information regarding health for this species was not investigated due to the fact that the
Butterworm is not legal to breed.

Waste
Information regarding waste substrates for this species was not investigated due to the fact that the
Butterworm is not legal to breed.

Conclusion
It is not allowed to breed this species and as such it cannot be used as a protein source.

Silk worm (Bombyx mori)

Housing
The silkworm is the larval stage of the silk moth and belongs to the family Bombycidae. It has been
domesticated and bred mainly to produce large quantities of silk, but has also been a human food
source in China and Japan (Tomotake et al., 2010). It is advised to use dried pupae as ingredients for
feed, as they are highest in protein; up to 55.6 %, including essential amino acids like valine,
methionine and phenylalanine. Another 32.2 % consists of fatty acids (Tomotake et al., 2010). As the
pupa includes a certain amount of silk, this may also be harvested.

In the wild the species mainly consumes mulberry leaves, but experiments with artificial diets have
been performed since 1960s (ITO, 1960). Artificial diets have led to a lower larval survival rate and a
lower resistance to disease (Zhou et al., 2008), but given the disadvantages of having to gather fresh
mulberry leaves and the costs of a powdered leaf diet, an artificial diet is a far more feasible option.

For any larval growth to occur, the following amino acids are essential: arginine, histidine, isoleucine,
leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan and valine. Growth will be
suboptimal unless one or more of the following amino acids are added to the diet. Growth will
improve considerably with addition of alanine, cysteine, glycine, serine and tyrosine. Either sterols,
vegetable oils or fatty acids are essential as a lipid; soybean oil is recommended (Ito, 1967). The
higher in moisture the food is, the easier the silkworm will assimilate it, positively impacting larval
growth. The optimum lies at ± 70 % moisture (Paul et al., 1992). Density is not an issue, the larvae
can be kept crowded if they have enough food at all times.
Optimally, the larvae are kept at ± 25 °C and 75 % humidity in lidded containers, as they are good
climbers. They are delicate and prone to bruising, so careful handling is recommended.

The larvae take 20-30 days to mature and start weaving their cocoon; this process will take around
three days. After two or three weeks the adult emerges, ready to mate. They do not require food and
do not fly. Females lay up to 350 eggs before dying; these eggs take around three weeks to hatch. In
captivity, this cycle can be completed up to three times a year (MendipSilks, 2014).

Amino acid profile

The silkworm showed a highly favorable crude protein/crude fat rate. This species did, nevertheless,
not meet the required lysine levels for the majority of the analyzed feed types and furthermore
displayed low EAAI values for all feed types.

Table 19 Essential amino acid composition of the Silkworm shown in g/kg of dry matter

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 537.6 80.9 22.5 13.9 17.3 28.3 25.4 7.5 15.6 16.7 4.0 22.0

(Finke, 2002)

Health
No health risks towards humans or livestock are known for the silkworm. It is susceptible to the
nucleopolyhedrovirus, which, when a space is infected, is hard to get rid of and is potentially
transmitted to progeny after contraction (Khurad et al., 2004). They are also capable of contracting
and transmitting Nosema bombycis and Nosema sp. M11 to their progeny (Han and Watanabe,
1988).

Waste
As previously mentioned, larvae require fresh mulberry leaves for optimal development, making the
silkworm an unsuitable species for rearing on waste streams.

Conclusion
The silkworm’s diet makes this species unsuitable as a protein source. It furthermore lacks the
capacity to be reared on waste. In addition, the amino acid profile is highly unfavorable to be used in
animal feeds. Overall, the silkworm is not a promising alternative protein source.

Waxworm (Galleria mellonella)

Housing
Waxworms are the larvae of the honeycomb moth (family Pyralidae). They are a serious pests for
beehives and this species should be prevented from escaping. In the wild they feed on beeswax, but
this has been shown to be nonessential in their diet (HAYDAKM, 1936). The larvae accept wheat,
corn, flour, yeast and sugars as an artificial diet, but the number of eggs and larval survival are higher
when the waxworms are also supplied with wax (Ashfaq et al., 2005). Larval growth and survival are
optimal when one egg is used per gram of diet (REALPE et al., 2008).
Optimally, the larvae are kept at temperatures of ±32 °C with 75 % humidity and 24 hours of
darkness. The larvae can climb, so the enclosures should be closed. They will spin webs throughout
their enclosure and eventually move to the top to spin their cocoon; this may assist in collection.
After two weeks they will emerge as moths. The adults do not require any specific circumstances for
mating and will only live for ±7 days. They can fly, so they should be kept well contained. Oviposition
rate is optimal when ± 150 moths are housed together (REALPE et al., 2008). The eggs have an
incubation period of around 6 days before hatching into new larvae.

Amino acid profile

The wax moth showed higher lysine levels than required for half of the analyzed of animal feeds. It
furthermore showed average EAAI values and a high crude fat content. For this reason wax moths
have so far been used as feed for pets and zoo insectivores (Table 20) (Finke, 2002).

Table 20 Essential amino acid composition of the waxworm shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

larvae 339.8 600.0 17.1 8.0 15.2 29.9 19.0 5.3 12.8 14.2 2.9 16.4

(Finke, 2002)

Health
The waxworm is currently a widely-used model organism for the study of a number of human
diseases, as their immune system is strikingly similar to that of humans. Therefore, they can be
infected by harmful bacteria such as Legionella pneumophila, Listeria pathogenesis, Francisella
tularensis, the fungus Candida albicans and others (Aperis et al., 2007). It is advised to screen any
personnel that will be in contact with the animals beforehand to prevent any contamination
andand/or isolate the waxworms as well as possible.

There could also be a connection between contact with waxworms and the development of asthma
and other respiratory irritations (Siracusa et al., 2003).

Waste
There was no information regarding the option towards rearing waxworms on waste.

Conclusion
The high crude fat content makes this species less favorable for production of protein. With regards
to health aspects the silkworm is also not ideal to rear. Finally, the low EAAI values confirm that the
silkworm cannot be considered a realistic candidate alternative protein source.

Orthoptera (crickets, locusts and katydids)

Insects of this order are prevalent around the world, famously aggregating in swarms in some
locations. As such, they have long been a food source for both animals and humans. Most species are
herbivorous or omnivorous; cannibalism is common in cases of food shortage.

This group of insects undergoes incomplete metamorphosis; the juveniles look like smaller adults
without wings. Adults are the largest phase and richest in nutrients, though the wings are an extra
source of undesirable chitin; as such, final-instar nymphs are recommended as a feed ingredient.
Generally, both juveniles and adults can jump, adults can fly and both are prone to escaping, so their
enclosures should have secure lids.

Chinese grasshopper (Acrida cinerea)

Housing
The Chinese grasshopper has been shown to have great nutritional value (Wang et al., 2007), but has
not yet been mass-reared in captivity; so far it has been wild-caught. However, two related species,
Oxya fuscovittata and Spathosternum prasiniferum prasiniferum, have been mass reared (Das et al.,
2009) and so these will be discussed here under the assumption that the Chinese grasshopper has
similar needs.

For an optimal growth and egg hatching rate, these two species are reared at temperatures around
32 °C and 70-80 % humidity, with a light cycle of 11 hours light. The species are herbivorous and as
such can be fed with fruit and vegetables. For every three adult females two males should be
provided. The species do best on a substrate of 8-10 cm of sand. The optimal density of the crickets is
5-25 individuals per 10 cm3. The Chinese grasshopper itself has powerful legs that allow long jumps
and wings that allow sustained flight, so enclosures should be secure (Wilson, 2003).

The average adult lifespan of this type of grasshopper is 30-35 days.

Amino acid profile

Nutrient analysis of the Chinese grasshoppers showed a high protein and a low crude fat content
(Wang et al., 2007). The Chinese grasshopper was found to be higher in lysine than required for all
analyzed feed types except for pig and broiler chicken feed. This species furthermore showed
average EAAI values.

Table 21 Essential amino acid composition of the Chinese grasshopper shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adults 654.2 83 34.2 27.9 26.1 49.5 37.9 17 20.6 21.5 31.4

(Wang et al., 2007)

Health
There are no known health risks that are specific to this grasshopper. Issues addressed under general
health still apply.

Waste
Grasshoppers require fresh food for their reproduction and there are no reports of them being
reared on waste.

Conclusion
Chinese grasshoppers were fed to broilers at inclusion levels 40 % (replacing fish meal) with no
adverse results in chicken growth and performance comparing to control diets (Liu and Lian, 2003).

The Chinese grasshopper can be mass reared, assuming that it is similar to the two related species
(Oxya fuscovittata and Spathosternum prasiniferum prasiniferum). The amino acid profiles are
favorable and the high protein/low crude fat content ratio is also good. The Chinese cricket,
however, cannot provide enough lysine for pig and broiler chicken feed. This species is also suitable
for mass rearing with regards to health. Lastly, it is only able to be reared on fresh food. This makes it
a suitable candidate for mass rearing as long as fresh food can be obtained cheaply. Overall, this
species may be considered moderately promising.

False katydid (Microcentrum rhombifolium)

Housing
The false katydid is a promising feed insect as it is high in protein and fiber and low in fat, compared
to most other species often used for food and feed (Oonincx and Dierenfeld, 2012). For optimal
growth the species should be kept at ± 27 °C and 50 % humidity (NICKLE, 1976). It accepts fruit and
vegetable matter as food and foliage of most plants; it is a notable pest on ornamental plants. The
katydid requires a light cycle of 12 hours light and will feed during the day (Bugguide, 2013). They can
climb and jump, so the cages should be closed.

Under optimal circumstances it will take nymphs 7 to 8 weeks to mature (Grove, 1959). Males will
attract females with song; no specific requirements are needed for copulation. The female deposits
the eggs on the underside of food plant leaves and the eggs will hatch after 10 to 20 days (Grove,
1959).

Amino acid profile

No amino acid profile was found for the false katydid.

Health
Due to the fact that the false katydid does not have a known amino acid profile, it was deemed
superfluous to investigate diseases related to this species.

Waste
The false katydid can be reared on foliage, fruit and vegetable waste.

Conclusion
The false katydid lacks information on its amino acid profile. Combined with the fact that it is difficult
to rear due to their oviposition habits, this makes them unsuitable for mass rearing. They can,
however, be reared on foliage, fruit and vegetable waste, which is a plus if the oviposition problem is
overcome.

Field cricket (Gryllus testaceus)

Housing
The field cricket is rarely reared in captivity and as such there is little available information on the
subject of its housing, but its care seems to be very similar to that of house crickets (see below). It is
recommended they be kept at temperatures of ± 30.5 °C with 0-25 % humidity for adults and 25-50
% humidity for juveniles. The species is herbivorous and accepts on grains, fruit and vegetables.
Moist sand should be provided as an oviposition site and be kept moist for the duration of egg
development; airtight incubators can also be used.
Amino acid profile
According to a nutrient analysis by Wang et al. (2004), field crickets have 583 g protein per kg of dry
matter, while fat content is about 103 g/kg on dry matter basis. The levels of essential amino acids
are shown in Table 22. Tryptophan was not determined in the same study. The field cricket showed
moderate to high EAAI values and met the required levels of lysine for all analyzed animal feeds.

Table 22 Essential amino acid composition of the field cricket shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adults 583 103 36.7 19.4 30.9 55.2 47.9 19.3 28.6 27.5 ND 44.2

(Wang et al., 2004)

Health
No health risks are currently associated with the field cricket. Aspects addressed under general
health still apply.

Waste
Field crickets naturally feed on plant material and as such they can be reared on grains, fruit and
vegetable waste.

Conclusion
Field crickets are relatively easy to care for and can feed on a range of vegetable matter, including
vegetable waste. A big disadvantage is that they are remarkably low in tryptophan (Wang et al.,
2004). With regards to health, the field cricket is very favorable, as no additional risks are known.
Lastly, this species shows consistently sufficient lysine levels and average EAAI values. Overall, this
species may be considered a promising alternative protein source.

House cricket (Acheta domesticus)

Housing
For optimal growth, the crickets should be kept at temperatures of ± 30.5 °C with 0-25 % humidity.
25-50 % humidity is required for newly hatched juveniles, but moisture is detrimental to later instars
and adults. It is therefore suggested not to keep the crickets in glass containers as this induces more
condensation. Instead, plastic or cardboard is suggested, in combination with lids (CLIFFORD et al.,
1977). The species is omnivorous and is able to feed on a wide range of organic materials, but has
been shown to grow suboptimally when fed only on vegetable matter (McFarlane et al., 1959). Water
should be provided by means of soaked cotton, as the crickets could drown otherwise.

Oviposition sites should consist of moist sand or a sand-clay mixture and be kept moist for the
duration of egg development. Airtight incubators can also be used. The eggs will hatch after around
13 days and nymphs will mature in around 45 days; the adults live for 70 to 90 days. Under favorable
condition it can produce up to 7 generations per year (Makkar et al., 2017).

Nymphs have higher growth rates when raised in groups of 10 to 25 (Jobin and Huor, 1966;
McFarlane, 1962) but are commercially raised in numbers of up to 10,000. Optimal density is
considered approximately 2,000 crickets per m2 (Makkar et al., 2014). Cannibalism should be kept to
a minimum as long as there is enough food present.
Amino acid profile
Nutrient analysis showed a favorable crude protein / crude fat ratio for the house cricket, as can be
seen in Table 23. The house cricket met the lysine demands for the majority of animal feeds, but
showed relatively low EAAI values compared to other analyzed species.

Table 23 Amino acid composition of the house crickets shown in g/kg of dry matter.

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adult 665.6 220.8 40.6 15.6 30.5 66.6 35.7 9.7 21.1 24.0 4.2 34.7

(Finke, 2002)

Health
No health risks are currently associated with the house cricket. Aspects discussed under general
health still apply.

Waste
House crickets are omnivorous and as such they can be fed on grains, fruit, vegetable and dry meat
waste.

Conclusion
The house cricket is a proven viable species for mass rearing; it is omnivorous, easy to care for and
can be kept in crowded conditions. There is little to no risk of disease and the species is furthermore
high in protein. In contrast, the EAAI values for house cricket are relatively low and this species is
therefore considered a little promising alternative.

Broiler chickens fed with 25 % house cricket protein and 75 % maize had higher growth rates than
broilers fed on maize-soybean diet (Nakagaki et al., 1987) indicating the value of this species in the
replacement of soybean meal.

Migratory locust (Locusta migratoria)

Housing
Migratory locusts are a common food source in the pet trade. As a desert species, they require
warmer, drier housing than other feeder species; they thrive at temperatures of 32-36 °C, with as
little humidity as possible (Hoste et al., 2002); moisture is detrimental to the locust’s health.
Ventilation is essential to minimize humidity and it is suggested to use wire for at least one side of
the enclosure. These circumstances do facilitate the spread of dust and this should be prevented in
another way.

The locust’s diet consists of vegetable matter; grass should be a large part of this and the more of it is
replaced by other food sources such as grains and vegetables, the lower the animals’ protein content
becomes (Oonincx and van der Poel, 2011). No water is required as the animal acquires everything
from its food. They are known to eat large amounts and should not be allowed to run out of food for
risk of cannibalism.
No specific conditions are required for copulation, but females do require oviposition sites consisting
of 7 to 8 cm of damp sand. The sand should be kept damp in order for the eggs to develop. It is
advised to use plastic tubs or something similar as oviposition sites so the moist sand can be kept
separate from the adult enclosure. Airtight incubators can also be used. The eggs will hatch after ± 10
days and a juvenile enclosure can then be set up, it will take the nymphs roughly two months to
mature (Hoste et al., 2002). It is advised to rear between 500-1,000 locusts per 0.5 m3 (Roessingh et
al., 1993).

Amino acid profile

No amino acid profile was found for the migratory locust.

Health
Migratory locusts are not associated with diseases that are a risk to humans or livestock, however,
they are susceptible to entomopox viruses (Purrini et al., 1988). They are otherwise not implicated in
health or disease except for the issues addressed under general health.

Waste
Neither locust nymphs nor adults can feed on waste alone, since they require fresh grass in their diet.
Experiments conducted on the effect of diet on the chemical composition of the locusts revealed that
when adult locusts fed solely on grass a higher protein content (649 g/kg of dry matter) than when
fen on grass and wheat bran (583 g/kg of dry matter) or on grass, wheat bran and carrots (555 g/kg
of dry matter) was obtained (Oonincx & de Poel, 2011). Interestingly, the fat content of the locust
was inversely proportional of the protein. The lowest fat content was calculated for locusts fed on
grass (186 g/kg of dry matter) and the highest for those fed on grass, wheat bran and carrots (296
g/kg of dry matter) (Oonincx & de Poel, 2011).

Conclusion
The migratory locust is not recommended as a feed ingredient unless at least a big portion of their
diet can consist of grass. If this is not a problem it is quite a viable species for mass rearing in
captivity, as they can be kept under crowded conditions and their care is not complicated.
Additionally, they are not associated with human health issues.

Mormon cricket (Anabrus simplex)

Housing
The Mormon cricket is a katydid and a current pest in the U.S.A., with potential to be an invasive
species elsewhere, so it should be kept well contained.

Growth and reproduction are optimal when the air temperature is 30 °C and soil temperature is 35
°C. Humidity is not an issue; the species thrives in a wide range of circumstances (Srygley, 2014).

As a crop pest, Mormon crickets feed on most types of plant matter, including grass, hay, grains and
ornamental foliage (Macknet et al., 2006). It also accepts dandelion, wild mustards, fungi and other
insects, including its own kind; it is actively attracted to dead crickets (Capinera, 1987; MacVean and
Capinera, 1991). As it forms great swarms in the wild, traveling from food source to food source, they
can be kept under crowded circumstances as long as there is enough food.
Nymphs mature in 60-90 days. The adults are flightless, but capable of jumping, so a lid should still
be provided. The females deposit the eggs in sand of ± 2.5 cm deep. The eggs will hatch after ± 70
days. For an optimal hatch rate, soil moisture should be around 0-25 % (Srygley, 2014).

Broiler diets including 65 % maize grain and 35 % ground Mormon crickets sustained better chicken
growth in comparison with control diets based on maize, fishmeal and meat meal (DeFoliart et al.,
1982).

Amino acid profile

The study on the protein and fat content showed a crude protein content of 580 g/kg dry matter and
a crude fat content of 144 g/kg dry matter (Defoliart et al., 1982). Remarkably, the results are similar
to those of the field cricket. Like the field cricket, the Mormon cricket was also observed to produce
sufficient amounts of lysine to meet the requirements of all feed types that were analyzed.
Methionine, arginine and tryptophan were the most limiting amino acids as shown in feed trials to
broiler chickens (DeFoliart et al., 1982). Further experiments confirmed the hypothesis that Mormon
crickets can successfully replace soybean meal in chicken diets (Finke et al., 1985). Regarding the
most limiting amino acids (methionine and arginine), the same authors suggested the
supplementation of Mormon cricket protein with sunflower or sesame meal when fed to chicken.
The crude protein/crude fat rate is furthermore favorable and the EAAI values were found to be
moderate to high.

Table 24 Essential amino acid composition of the Mormon cricket shown in g/kg of dry matter

Instar CP CF Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

adults 580 144 26.1 19.1 30.7 49.9 36.0 20.2 16.2 27.8 2.9 34.8

(DeFoliart et al., 1982)

Health
Mormon crickets are susceptible to Vairimorpha n. sp., which can lead to significant mortality within
the cricket population (MacVean and Capinera, 1991). In stages of rapid growth and molting, they are
susceptible to the fungus Metarhizium acridum, as their immune system is knocked down during
these periods (Srygley, 2012). Mormon crickets are also a host for Gordius robustus, a parasitic
nematode (Thorne, 1940).

Waste
Mormon crickets can be reared on many types of plants including grass and dead insects, including
its own kind. As such discarded insects from other enclosures can be fed to this cricket as long as
they are free of disease and dead Mormon crickets do not have to be removed from their own
enclosure under the same conditions.

Conclusion
As a swarming crop pest, the Mormon cricket accepts a wide range of plant and insect food sources
and can be kept under crowded conditions. The amino acid profile and lysine levels of the Mormon
cricket are furthermore promising. However, it has not been reared on waste before and it is not
known if it will accept vegetable waste or will only grow on wild plants / fresh grass and hay. As such
this species cannot yet be recommended for mass-rearing. They are also the cricket most susceptible
to disease, yet this is still minimal in occurrence. Overall, this species can be considered moderately
promising.

Earthworms and Vermicompost

Earthworms belong to the phylum Annelida (ringworms). They live in the soil and are considered
major players in chemical soil processes by altering chemical, biological and physical properties of the
soil (Domínguez et al., 2010). After their activity, soil structure is modified and the decomposition
process is accelerated. More than 4,000 species of earthworms have been described, but for most of
these little is known about their life history. They are generally classified into three ecological
categories regarding their feeding strategy: endogeic (soil feeders), anecic (burrowers) and epigeic
(litter feeders). Species from the first two categories feed on a blend of organic matter and soil while
epigeic earthworms feed exclusively on organic matter. Representatives from endogeic and anecic
groups are earthworm species from the genera Lumbricus and Nicodrilus (family Lumbricidae). They
can also feed on both fresh and decomposing organic matter. Epigeic species feed exclusively on
organic matter and most commonly used in vermicomposting facilities are Eisenia fetida, Perionyx
excavatus and Eudrilus eugeniae (Dominguez et al., 2010). For all species it is advised to remove
undigested plant matter before the substrate grows too acidic.

Regarding epigeic species, the most commonly used in vermicomposting facilities are the species
below. Apart from their natural ability to consume organic matter, they have shown high tolerance
to extreme environmental conditions, high reproductive rates and short life cycles.

Housing
It is recommended to keep earthworms at 15-20 °C; reproduction is optimal at higher temperatures,
but adult survival and body mass are suboptimal (Lowe and Butt, 2005). The enclosures should be
kept under 24 hours of darkness; light can be used to prevent escape. For long-time observation
purposes or other uses, red light can be used, as this is imperceptible and harmless to the worms
(Nuutinen and Butt, 1997). The substrate should be at least 10 cm deep and be kept at 25-30 %
moisture. It is advised to keep no more than 1,200 worms per m2, as greater densities have a
negative effect on the growth and reproduction rate and overall health, even if there is enough
nutrition (Klok, 2007). It has been suggested that housing of epigeic species is easier compared to
endogeic and anecic, however there is no clear evidence supporting this claim.

After mating, adult worms prefer to deposit their cocoons in moist soil. Under optimal
circumstances, one cocoon can be produced every week (per two worms). Cocoon incubation is
fastest at 20 °C and maximal moisture; filter paper on water is recommended (Butt et al., 1992).
Optimally, the cocoons hatch after 90 days, and juveniles mature within 3 months.

Amino Acids
Nutrient composition of the earthworms has not been extensively studied. Nevertheless, to the best
of our knowledge, four studies include values of the essential amino acids for seven earthworm
species (table 25). In the second study (Moreki, 2012), crude protein and crude fat are shown as a
means for the three described epigeic species while tryptophan was not detected. The earthworm
showed remarkably high crude protein/crude fat rates and all seven species were able to meet the
lysine demands for every type of animal feed. Lumbricus terrestis showed the lowest EAAI values,
while Lumbricus rubellus showed the highest values. .
Table 25. Essential amino acid composition of three earthworm species shown in g/kg of dry
matter.

Earthworm species CP Arg His Iso Leu Lys Met Phe Thr Try Val

Lumbricus rubellus1 630.6 56 63 47 54 51 35 45 45 43 52

Lumbricus terrestis2 640.2 37.2 14 23.2 45.7 40.2 11.6 22.5 28.6 5.5 26.2

Nicodrilus caliganosus3 667 50.1 15.5 22.3 43.1 46.6 9.3 33.9 27.6 24.8 30.9

Nicodrilus roseus3 494 40.7 12.3 19.3 39.4 35.6 9.4 21.1 30 ND 23.1

Eisenia felida4 630 60.2 21.2 29 61.7 48.8 11.4 22.5 28.1 ND 37.8

Eudrilus eugeniae4 630 58 19.5 28.8 60.5 49.4 11 20.1 27.1 ND 37.5

Perionyx excavatus4 630 58.7 20.2 28.6 62 49.1 12 22.8 26.5 ND 37

(1Istiqomah et al. 2009; 2Finke, 2002; 3Pokarzhevskii et al., 1997; 4Moreki, 2012).

Health
Earthworms can accumulate particular metals such as cadmium, zinc, copper and lead in their bodies
and reduce potential toxic elements from the soil (Frederickson et al., 2007) resulting in high quality
compost. This has been reported for many species including Lumbricus rubellus (Veltman et al.,
2007), Nicodrilus caliganosus (Nannoni et al., 2011) as well as for the epigeic species Eisenia fetida (Li
et al., 2010). The presence of these toxic elements can however be problematic when they are
ground into feed.

The Eisenia fetida earthworm is capable of vectoring EHEC O157:H7 (Prysor Williams et al., 2006).
This means that the waste that earthworms are being fed on should be screened for this pathogen
before they are placed on it and later processed into protein.

The microflora of the Eisenia fetida earthworm contains certain bacterial species that also include
pathogens to humans or livestock; these species include but are not limited to Bacillus, Klebsiella,
Microbacterium, Pseudomonas and Streptomyces (Kim et al., 2004). It is however unknown if they
are capable of carrying the specific species that are responsible for disease in livestock.

It is however known that Eisenia fetida is specifically capable of carrying Bacillus anthracis-like
bacteria, and as such it should be researched if the earthworm can be infected by the anthrax
bacterium specifically (Schuch et al., 2010).
Waste
As detritivores, earthworms grow very well on waste and organic matter. There is a distinction
between species that are exclusively detritivores and those, such as Lumbricus and Nicodrilus
species, that are also able to feed on fresh leaves.

There are several experimental examples of earthworms being fed on different kinds of waste
products such as pig manure (Gómez-Brandón et al., 2011; Li et al., 2010; Monroy et al., 2009), cattle
manure (Lazcano et al., 2008), food and paper waste (Arancon et al., 2008), industrial waste and
sludge (Yadav and Garg, 2011) or even on municipal sewage sludge for bioremediation purposes
(Azarpira et al. 2013). Animal manure can be added and left indefinitely. It does not need to be fresh,
but it is advised to use thinner layers of substrate in this case to prevent anaerobic situations in
which this species cannot survive (Earthworm works).

The worms’ waste can be used both as compost for plants and mushrooms and as a part of the
worms’ own diet, as it contains a rich community of digestive microbes that further aid the
decomposition of the rest of their diet (Earthworm works).

Conclusion
Besides providing valuable biomass for chicken feed, earthworms also add high-value compost for
plants. Their capacity to be reared on waste and the low health risks are favorable for mass rearing.
With regards to the amino acid profiles there is variation between earthworm species. The lysine
levels are consistently sufficient for animal feeds, but the levels of the other essential amino acids
fluctuate between different species. With regards to waste, housing and health aspects earthworms
can be considered promising candidates as an alternative protein source. The amino acid profile of
the seven analyzed earthworm species looks promising as well, but it requires more extensive
research to give a well-founded advice.
Chapter 5: Results and discussion

Insects
Table 25 shows the EAAI values of the amino acid profiles of three conventionally used protein
sources compared with protein derived from various insect species. The reference protein sources
that were analyzed were soybean meal, fish meal and rapeseed meal, which are currently the most
conventional protein sources. The crude protein and essential amino acid levels of these protein
sources used for calculating the EAAI values are the highest found in literature. In contrast, the
lowest protein content and essential amino acid levels of insects found were used. The chance of
overestimating the amino acid levels and protein content of the insect species is herewith minimized
and therefore the results are likely to be more favorable in reality. Since lysine is generally the
limiting amino acid in many animal feeds, the main focus lies on the insect species which are higher
in lysine than the conventional protein source or the feed requirements.

As was mentioned earlier, an EAAI value of 1 indicates a high similarity between the amino acid
profiles of the insect and the conventional protein source. An EAAI value higher than 1 indicates that
the insect protein provides higher quantities of essential amino acids than the conventional source.
The cells in table 26 are color scaled relative to the highest EAAI value found per conventional
protein source (i.e. a red color illustrates insect species that are low in essential amino acids
compared to the reference protein, while green indicates insects that are higher in essential amino
acids than the reference protein). The presence of a blue-colored data bar points out insects that
contain higher lysine levels than the reference protein. The length of the blue bars are relative to the
highest EAAI value found for an insect higher in lysine than the conventional protein source it is
compared to.
Table 26. EAAI values of 18 insect species that were compared with three conventional protein sources; soybean meal,
fish meal and rapeseed meal.

Insect Species Soybean Meal Fish Meal Rapeseed Meal

Black Soldier Fly 0,98 1,08 1
(Larvae)

Black Soldier Fly 1,04 1,16 1,06

(Pupae)

0,98 1,07 0,99

House Fly (Adults)

1,15 1,27 1,17

House Fly (Pupae)

Face Fly (Pupae) 0,95 1,05 0,97

Mealworm 0,89 0,98 0,9

(Larvae)
Mealworm 0,82 0,9 0,82
(Adults)

Lesser Mealworm 1,03 1,14 1,05

(Larvae)

Superworm 1,13 1,25 1,15

(Larvae)
Waxworm 0,86 0,95 0,87
(Larvae)

0,7 0,77 0,71

Silkworm (Larvae)

House Cricket 0,84 0,92 0,84

(Adults)

Mormon Cricket
(Late stage 0,94 1,03 0,94
nymphs/Adults)
Field Cricket (Late
stage 1,41 1,56 1,44
nymphs/Adults)

Dubia Cockroach 0,87 0,96 0,88

(Adult females)
Six Spot Roach 0,88 0,98 0,9
(Adults)
Death Head
Cockroach 0,92 1,03 0,94
(Adults)
Turkestan
Cockroach 0,94 1,03 0,95
(Nymphs)
African Palm
0,87
Weevil (Larvae) 0,95 0,87
Termites
(Reproductive
adults) 1,57 1,72 1,58
Chinese
Grasshopper
(Mixed instars) 1,09 1,21 1,11
The cells are color scaled from red to green relative to the highest EAAI value calculated per conventional protein source.
A blue-colored data bar points out insects that contain higher lysine levels than the conventional protein source it is
compared to. The length of the blue bars are relative to the highest EAAI value found for an insect higher in lysine than
the conventional protein source it was compared to. The numbers refer to the EAAI values, where everything above one
indicates a higher essential amino acid quantity for the insect than the quantity of essential amino acids of the
conventional protein sources.

Termites and field cricket species show higher lysine levels than all three reference proteins. For
these reference proteins, termites show the highest EAAI values (1.57, 1.72 and 1.58 respectively).
Houseflies, Mormon crickets and Turkestan cockroaches showed higher lysine levels than soybean
and rapeseed meal, but only housefly pupae (1.15 and 1.17 respectively) show EAAI values higher
than 1. Wax worms and Chinese grasshoppers furthermore show higher lysine levels than rapeseed
meal, but only Chinese grasshoppers also show an EAAI value (1.11) higher than 1.

Table 27. EAAI values of 18 insect species that were compared with various types of animal feed.

Species | Feed Broiler Layer Chicken Channel Chinook Common Carp Nile Tilapia
Dog Feed Cat Feed
Requirements Chicken Feed Feed Turkey Feed Pig Feed catfish Feed salmon Feed Feed Feed

Black Soldier Fly (Larvae) 0,84 0,91 0,91 1,32 1,2 1,02 0,92 0,96 1,16 1,75

Black Soldier Fly (Pupae) 0,89 0,98 0,98 1,25 1,18 1,07 0,94 1,07 1,24 1,87

House Fly (Adults) 1,08 1,2 1,2 1,47 1,72 1,53 1,24 1,54 1,35 2,04

House Fly (Pupae) 0,96 1,05 1,05 1,48 1,34 1,14 1 1,29 1,36 2,06

Face Fly (Pupae) 0,83 0,9 0,9 1,23 1,04 0,89 0,78 1,01 1,12 1,7

Mealworm (Larvae) 0,94 0,98 0,98 1,34 1,4 1,24 1,01 1,04 1,23 1,86

Mealworm (Adults) 0,84 0,95 0,95 1,26 1,36 1,2 0,98 0,91 1,13 1,7

Lesser Mealworm (Larvae) 0,93 1,02 1,02 1,47 1,44 1,23 1,08 1,08 1,31 1,98

Superworm (Larvae) 0,96 0,95 0,95 1,51 1,34 1,14 1,01 1,07 1,33 2,02

Waxworm (Larvae) 0,92 1,05 1,05 1,29 1,48 1,31 1,07 1,11 1,19 1,8

Silkworm (Larvae) 0,75 0,81 0,81 1,05 1,22 1,08 0,88 0,95 0,97 1,46

House Cricket (Adults) 0,92 0,95 0,95 1,27 1,38 1,22 0,99 1,14 1,16 1,74
Mormon Cricket (Late stage
nymphs/Adults) 1,14 1,11 1,11 1,46 1,34 1,19 0,97 1,45 1,29 1,95
Field Cricket (Late stage
nymphs/Adults) 1,3 1,43 1,43 1,88 1,8 1,54 2,06 1,75 1,64 2,52
Dubia Cockroach (Adult
females) 0,73 0,8 0,8 1,17 1,01 0,86 0,76 0,83 1,03 1,55

Six Spot Roach (Adults) 0,75 0,82 0,82 1,2 1,05 0,89 0,79 0,86 1,04 1,57
Death Head Cockroach
(Adults) 0,79 0,86 0,86 1,26 1,11 0,96 0,83 0,88 1,09 1,66
Turkestan Cockroach
(Nymphs) 1,06 1,13 1,14 1,4 1,71 1,52 1,24 1,4 1,3 1,96

African Palm Weevil (Larvae) 0,76 0,98 0,85 1,28 1,65 1,47 1,51 1,09 1,17 1,8
Fungus-growing Termite
(Reproductive adults) 1,73 1,88 1,73 2,28 2,96 2,63 2,66 2,55 2,13 3,27
Chinese Grasshopper (Mixed
instars) 0,95 1,04 1,04 1,49 1,34 1,14 1,52 1,35 1,27 1,96
The cells are color scaled from red to green relative to the highest EAAI value calculated per conventional protein source.
A blue-colored data bar points out insects that contain higher lysine levels than the conventional protein source it is
compared to. The length of the blue bars are relative to the highest EAAI value found for an insect higher in lysine than
required for the specific animal feed it was compared to. The numbers refer to the EAAI values, where everything above
one indicates that the essential amino acid quantity provided by the insect surpasses the quantity required in the feed.

Table 27 displays the EAAI values of insect protein compared to various animal feeds. The main focus
lies on insect species with higher lysine contents than required for the various animal feeds and
therefore these will be mainly be discussed. Houseflies (pupae and adults), Mormon crickets, field
crickets, termites and Chinese grasshoppers show higher lysine contents than required for all
analyzed animal feeds. Adult houseflies, field crickets, termites, show EAAI values higher than 1 for
every type of feed. Termites show the highest EAAI values (1.73-3.27) for every type of feed.
Additionally, field crickets and Black soldier flies, Chinese grasshoppers and Turkestan cockroaches
show moderate EAAI values, but still meet the required lysine levels of the majority of animal feeds.
Discussion
To sum up the findings discussed above, we will outline the insect species that show the most
potential to be mass-reared, based on their amino acid profile, housing and health issues and the
types of waste they could bio convert. The species rank from highly to moderately promising.

It is of note that for the nutritional requirements of livestock, the most demanding values were used
and for the levels of amino acids provided by the insects the lowest values were used. This means
that the potential the insects have to offer will be underestimated in any case and can only be higher
and more promising than what is outlined in this project.

First of all, termites (Macrotermes spp.) show a very promising amino acid profile, being richer in all
amino acids than required for most types of feed. However, this has been researched only for
reproductive termites; it is unsure if workers have the same profile. Their housing is also problematic
as they form social colonies and build large nests, requiring large amounts of space and high-quality
ventilation. They can convert any type of vegetable waste, as they feed on a fungus that develops on
the plant material, but this comes with its own difficulties and risks. All in all, termites could be a
viable option if an efficient method to mass-rear them would be developed, but as of now this is still
an unresolved issue.

Field crickets (Gryllus testaceus) are richer than required in all amino acids, except arginine for broiler
feed. They are already reared on a large scale for cricket flour production, but there was no
information available on the methods used and as such it is assumed their care is similar to that of
house crickets. If this turns out to be the case, they can be reared on vegetable waste, including
grains. Overall they are a promising species for both mass-rearing and as a feed ingredient.

The housefly (Musca domestica) is richer than required in all amino acids except for arginine for
broiler feed and threonine in pig and carp feed. They are very easy to house as they will bio convert
any type of waste, including manure and can be reared under crowded conditions. However, there
are a number of health issues associated with this species. All in all they are promising, but they will
have to be securely monitored for disease.

The Mormon cricket (Anabrus simplex) is lower in arginine than required for broiler, layer and turkey
feed, in tryptophan for layer, turkey, pig, catfish, carp, dog and cat feed, in valine for dog feed and
generally insufficient for salmon feed. It is sufficiently rich in amino acids for tilapia feed and higher
in lysine than required for any feed. This species is easy to rear as it can convert any type of
vegetable waste and also readily accepts other insects as a food source. There are few health issues
associated with this cricket. Overall, it is a promising feed ingredient, especially when combined with
other species.

The Turkestan cockroach (Blatta lateralis) is lower in tryptophan than required for layer, turkey, pig
and dog feed, in lysine for turkey and dog feed, in methionine for broiler, layer, turkey and tilapia
feed and in threonine for dog feed. It is sufficient for catfish, salmon and carp feed. Turkestan
cockroaches are easy to rear as they are omnivorous and can be kept under crowded conditions.
There are a number of health issues associated with cockroaches in general and this species
specifically, so their hygiene should be carefully monitored. In summary, they are the most suitable
of the cockroaches, which is a promising group in general.
The lesser mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus) is sufficiently rich in amino acids for any feed, but their
health risks make it a moderately instead of highly promising species; it is known as a pest in turkey
farms, so they are known to be capable of carrying a number of diseases. However, this does not
mean they will carry those diseases in a mass-rearing facility. If their hygiene is carefully monitored
they could still be a highly promising species.

The black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) is currently the most reared insect for the purpose of being
used in animal feed as well as in waste management. It is sufficiently high in lysine for all feed types
except for broiler and carp and (based on its diet) lower in some amino acids for certain species, but
no specific pattern emerges. Pupae are richer in nutrients than larvae.

Rearing the black soldier fly has proven easy; they can convert any type of waste including manure
and can be housed under crowded conditions. Health wise there are few issues. All in all, they are
not the most promising species nutrient-wise, but their housing, rearing and waste-converting
abilities have made it the most successful species for this purpose so far.

In general, an insect’s diet has great influence on its eventual nutritional value; the substrate used
translates more or less directly into the amino acid levels of the end product. Insects can be
supplemented with amino acids they are naturally low on. For example, houseflies grow faster,
become larger and are ultimately richer in nutrients when reared on poultry and calf manure rather
than horse and cattle manure (Khan, 2012).

There are several species that have shown promising amino acid profiles suitable to replace
conventional feed sources. Overall, insect crude protein content is higher than that of soybean meal
and somewhat lower than fish meal (Belluco et al., 2013). Nevertheless, according to this research,
there is no perfect species that meets all the animal feed requirements and is easy to rear on waste
without any health issues. Several studies showed the effect of substrate (diet) on the chemical
composition of some species (Oonincx & der Poel, 2011; Khan et al., 2012). Therefore it becomes
clear that in order to implement a large-scale insect rearing farm, the starting point, along with the
purpose of the end product, needs to be defined. If the aim is to create high-quality insect protein,
manure can be used as a substrate only for specific species and in most cases it should be combined
with additional nutritious ingredients. Even for species that naturally feed on manure, optimal diets
for high quality protein should be investigated. It is worth mentioning that if the focus lies on fast
production of insect protein, the use of manure as substrate could slow down this process. On the
other hand, when waste management is the priority of such an insect farm, adequate amounts of
manure should be regularly added into the system and the sanitary measures should be
implemented extensively as a precaution.

This study focused on the protein quality and the amino acid profile of some invertebrate species.
Like all other organisms, these species also contain lipids (crude fat content), minerals (such as
calcium, phosphorus, iron etc.), vitamins, carotenoids and fatty acids that cannot be ignored from the
complete nutrient analysis, also in terms of animal feed requirements. Insects with high fat content
could potentially be involved in the development of insect feed protein since defatting techniques
have been developed and the fat could be used for biodiesel production (Zheng et al, 2012). Other
techniques, such as cuticle removal for the reduction of the amount of chitin from the insect meal
and the improvement of the insect protein should be also optimized. Taking into account that most
insect species contain roughly the same amount of chitin (Finke, 2007) these techniques should be
species specific and perhaps stage specific. Furthermore, the digestibility levels of the different insect
proteins with and without chitin should be examined.

Insects exhibit specific characteristics of vital importance. They do not directly compete with
resources used for human consumption, can be reared on waste or other by-products and can bio
convert these into valuable protein for animal nutrition. They also have a high reproduction rate and
short generation time. In addition, when compared to soybean meal, insect protein requires fewer
natural resources in terms of land and water use for its production (Belluco et al., 2013). The great
variety of insect species occupying different habitats, have distinct developmental stages with
diverse feeding habits. These are also reasons that affect the nutritional quality of such proteins.

However, as mentioned above, in order to obtain high quality protein for animal feed, a balanced
essential amino acid profile is required. Since such a single species is unlikely to exist, balanced insect
protein could be achieved through mixtures of insect proteins from different species. The optimal
ratio of the protein of different species should again be defined by the specific feed requirements of
livestock and further research should be done into this topic.

Earthworms
Table 28. EAAI values of 7 earthworm species that were compared with three conventional protein sources; soybean
meal, fish meal and rapeseed meal.

Insect Species Soybean Meal Fish Meal Rapeseed Meal

Earthworm
(Lumbricus
terresstris) 0,84 0,93 0,85
Earthworm
(Lumbricus
rubellus) 1,8 1,96 1,8
Earthworm
(Eisenia felida) 1,27 1,41 1,29
Earthworm
(Eudrilus
eugeniae) 1,22 1,36 1,25
Perionyx
excavatus 1,26 1,39 1,28
Earthworm
(Nicodrilus
caliginosus) 1,02 1,12 1,02
Earthworm
(Nicodrilus
roseus) 1,09 1,08 1,07
The cells are color scaled from red to green relative to the highest EAAI value calculated per conventional protein source.
A blue-colored data bar points out insects that contain higher lysine levels than the conventional protein source it is
compared to. The length of the blue bars are relative to the highest EAAI value found for an insect higher in lysine than
the conventional protein source it was compared to.

EAAI values for seven earthworm species were furthermore calculated. Lumbricus terresstris was the
only earthworm species that shows EAAI values lower than 1 (0.84, 98, 0.85 for soybean meal, fish
meal and rapeseed meal respectively). The EAAI values of Lumbricus rubellus for every protein
conventional protein source were strikingly high.
Table 29. EAAI values of seven earthworm species that were compared with various types of animal feed.
Species |
Feed Broiler Chicken Layer Chicken Channel catfish Chinook salmon Common Carp Nile Tilapia
Requirements Feed Feed Turkey Feed Pig Feed Feed Feed Feed Feed Dog Feed Cat Feed
Earthworm
(Lumbricus
rubellus) 1,73 2,3 2,3 2,9 3,6 2,71 3,6 2,32 2,64 3,8

Earthworm
(Eisenia felida) 1,65 1,28 1,27 1,74 1,99 1,7 2,1 1,61 1,5 2,27
Earthworm
(Eudrilus
eugeniae) 1,14 1,25 1,25 1,69 1,95 1,66 2 1,58 1,45 2,19
Earthworm
(Perionyx
excavatus) 1,15 1,26 1,26 1,72 1,94 1,65 2,1 1,63 1,49 2,25
Earthworm
(Lumbricus
terresstris) 0,93 1,01 1,02 1,26 1,61 1,43 1,16 1,27 1,17 1,76
Earthworm
(Nicodrilus
caliginosus) 0,95 1,25 1,25 1,49 2,5 2,21 1,8 1,32 1,4 2,12
Earthworm
(Nicodrilus
roseus) 1,11 1,22 1,22 1,58 2,05 1,75 1,54 1,52 1,4 2,12
The cells are color scaled from red to green relative to the highest EAAI value calculated per conventional protein source.
A blue-colored data bar points out insects that contain higher lysine levels than the conventional protein source it is
compared to. The length of the blue bars are relative to the highest EAAI value found for an insect higher in lysine than
required for the specific animal feed it was compared to.

In Table 29 the EAAI values of seven earthworm species compared to various animal feeds are
displayed. All earthworm species are lysine sufficient for every animal feed, but the difference in
EAAI values between species is relatively high. L. rubellus is showing the highest EAAI values, while L.
terrestris shows the lowest EAAI values.

Discussion
The additional side research on earthworms revealed interesting findings. The EAAI values and lysine
levels of the majority of the analyzed earthworm species were promising, but there was substantial
variation in EAAI values between the species. Because earthworms as a protein source are not as
extensively studied as insects, less is known on their potential. As a result, the legislation is also not
clear on the mass rearing of earthworms as an alternative protein source. Earthworms in general are
furthermore known to accumulate heavy metals, such as cadmium and lead (Frederickson et al.,
2007). The earthworm species L. rubellus, which showed a promising amino acid profile, has also
been observed to accumulate heavy metals (Veltman et al., 2012). Future studies on the health
aspects of earthworms are therefore a prerequisite for a well-founded conclusion on their potential
as a novel protein source.
Chapter 6: Legislation
This aspect of the project aims to provide Company A with advice on legislation, specifically on the
introduction of insect meal to the livestock feed market as a substitute for other protein meals.
Stakeholders such as investors, farmers and entrepreneurs currently experience many barriers
towards the introduction of insect products on the market (Van Huis et al., 2013). One of the major
aspects that hinder these stakeholders is related to the current regulations on the use of insects by
the food and feed industry.

Legislation in the EU
Through the use of legislation, governmental bodies such as the European Commission define what is
and is not allowed with regards to the mass rearing of insects. Such legislation can form obstacles for
insect producers: legislation that has not been clearly defined can form its own type of obstacle,
especially with regards to the use of insect protein as livestock feed (Koeleman, 2014). Research has
shown that there are no regulations on insects within FAOLEX, a legislative database (Aarts, Hubert &
Katz, 2014). This might indicate such regulations are nonexistent. It is thought that this ambiguity on
possible regulations creates insecurity for insect rearing companies, as they are unsure of what is
lawfully allowed.

In the legislation it should be defined what types of insects are safe to rear and on what kind of
substrates these insects should be reared. The allowed methods of slaughtering should be covered in
the legislation as well and the specific animals that are allowed to be fed with insect protein meal
should be listed. In addition to the abovementioned aspects, laws concerning the trade and shipping
of live, dead and processed insects are crucial. This should then provide future breeders with a
guideline through the market they wish to enter with their insect-based products. As soon as the
aforementioned issues are covered in the legislation, it will become easier for insect breeders to
assess the feasibility of large-scale insect farming. Currently, there is already some legislation on the
European level, namely EC regulations, which are enforceable in all member states.

Facilities
According to insect producers, there is a lack of guidelines on the large scale rearing and sale of
insects for both food and feed. Even when regulations are in place, they can hinder producers in their
operations. Some producers state the current sanitary regulations for setting up such farms are strict
(van Huis et al., 2013). Although regulations are often lacking or unclear, some are clearly defined.
These are sometimes even directly related to the breeding of insects. Insect breeding producers have
to meet the requirements of a number of legislations. Both producers and distributors of animal feed
have to comply with the European Commission’s Regulation (EC) 183/2005 on feed hygiene (2005). It
is expected that this regulation applies to the rearing of insects as well, when the insects are reared
as a component for animal feed. It requires insect breeders and distributors to be registered with an
approved facility and to implement certain measures such as applying the Hazard Analysis Critical
Control Point principles to ensure a hygienic environment. From these facts it can be inferred that
although there are regulations on the breeding facilities, they are either strict or unclear for
producers.
Processing_the_insects
To assess whether insect protein can be used as a component of animal feed, there should be clarity
on the definition of insects. Regulation 68/2013 on the catalogue of feed materials does not mention
a specific passage for ‘insect meal’ (2013). They do mention ‘whole or parts of terrestrial
invertebrates’ in their catalogue, which implies the inclusion of insects in the list of protein sources
for animal feed (p.48). The Council Directive 2002/32/EC on ‘Undesirable Substances in Animal Feed’
has set several requirements that insect breeders have to meet with regards to the maximum levels
of contaminating materials in insects (2002). This was done to limit the potential human and animal
health risks of the animal feed. One of the material types covered in this list are heavy metals (Aarts
et al., 2014; Koeleman, 2014). The way insects are processed is important as well and is therefore
defined in regulations. To acquire a ‘Processed Animal Protein’ (PAP), producers have to process the
insects conform the Regulation (EC) 1069/2009 on animal by-products (2009; Koeleman, 2014). This
is also the case for insect material that is imported from Non-EU countries (Aarts et al., 2014).

In response to the Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy outbreak in 2001 the regulations related to
PAP derived from insects were adjusted. The European Commission proposed the Regulation (EC)
999/2001 concerning the prevention, control and eradication of transmissible spongiform
encephalopathies, which prohibits the use of all PAP including insect PAP from being used in animal
feed (2001).

The exceptions of this regulation are the use of hydrolysed PAP (Regulation (EC) 999/2001, 2001, p.
20; Aarts et al., 2014) and the use of fishmeal to feed non-ruminant livestock (fish, poultry and pigs)
(Smith & Pryor, 2013). Under Regulation (EU) 55/2013 the ban on the use of all PAP has been partly
lifted (2013). It is now allowed to feed aquaculture with PAP derived from non-ruminants as well
(PROteINSECT, 2013). Accurate diagnostic methods that are able to detect the presence of pig and
poultry material in animal feed are currently not available, which means that it is not possible to
ensure there is no intra-species recycling, which is prohibited (PROteINSECT, 2013). As it is displayed
in Fig. 4, it is expected that once these diagnostic methods do become available, the use of non-
ruminant PAP (including insect PAP) in poultry and pig feed will be reauthorized as well
(PROteINSECT, 2013).
Fig. 4 Target area for legislation regarding to use of Insect Protein (PROteINSECT, 2013)

Slaughtering
The Council of Animal Affairs indicated that both scientific knowledge and social morality with
regards to slaughtering are being taken into account when it comes to animal regulations in the
Netherlands (Raad voor Dieren Aangelegenheden, 2010). Although it is difficult to find standards or
regulations with regard to the slaughtering of insects, there are some aspects that could be taken
t
into consideration.

Whether or not insects experience feelings such as pain and stress is also a topic of current debate
on insect welfare.. According to Hakman, Peters and Van Huis (2013) insects are unlikely to
experience such feelings, although there
there is still no evidence to support this. Braithwaite (2010)
supported the idea that fish do feel pain but invertebrates do not. In contrast, other scientists
invoking evidence based on behavioral studies, believe that at least some arthropods experience
pain
in and suggest humane techniques of killing them (Elwood, 2011). To avoid or reduce the use of
methods that can induce pain and discomfort, quick and ‘painless’ techniques should be used when
the insects are slaughtered. On the European level, the Regulation (EC) 1099/2009 covers the
legislation regarding the protection of animals at time of killing (2009),
(2009) although
though this does not apply
to insects (Hakman, et al., 2013). Currently there are no rules formulated regarding the steps prior
to, during and after the
he slaughtering of insects. It is predicted that more clarity on the slaughtering of
insects can facilitate insect-derived
derived PAP to be allowed in these kinds of feed and to provide insects
breeders with more clarity on how they should organize their slaughtering
slaughtering process.

Insect feed
The substrates used for the insects rearing are essential, since not all substrates are allowed to be
used for an insect’s diet. In the same way, not all insect meal can be fed to all animals. By
distinguishing between categories of insects, the International Producers of Insects for Food and
Feed (IPIFF) provides an overview on the current regulations concerning the substrates that can be
used for insect rearing (Aarts et al., 2014). In their report they make a distinction between four
categories of insects, based on these substrates: 1. vegetable feed including eggs and dairy; 2. meat
and fish; 3. biological by-products and waste streams and; 4. manure. These categories are further
discussed in the coming paragraphs, including the products that can be made from these insects and
therefore the ways in which these products can be used.

1. The first category consists of insects that are fed with vegetable feed including eggs and dairy.
These insects are allowed to be used as live insects for pet food, as derived insect fat and hydrolyzed
insect PAP for pet and as non-ruminant livestock feed. Non-hydrolyzed PAP is only allowed to be
used in pet food. The IPIFF clarifies that although under Regulation (EU) 56/2013 (2013) insect PAP is
allowed to be fed to non-ruminant livestock, this PAP should come from a certified slaughterhouse.
Since the IPIFF states such a certification is technically not possible to be obtained for insect
breeders, it seems again that the regulations on the slaughtering of insects are a major barrier to
market non-hydrolyzed insect PAP (Aarts et al., 2014).

2. The second category consists of insects that are fed with vegetable feed including eggs and dairy
and also with meat and fish. It is not allowed to use this category insect in feed to the same extent as
the first category. Under restriction article 7 (Regulation 999/2001, 2001, p. 6), this second category
of insects is neither allowed to be used as derived products like protein meal and fats, nor as
hydrolyzed insect PAP in pet food and non-ruminant livestock feed. This means that although the
insects can be reared on more types of substrate, fewer products are allowed to be made from this
and fewer types of animals are allowed to be fed by this type of insects (Aarts et al., 2014).

3. The third category consists of insects that are fed with all biological by-products and waste
streams excluding manure and other types of feces and categorized material as prohibited to be fed
to animals (Aarts et al., 2014). The Regulation (EC) 767/2009 defines on prohibited materials: “Feces,
urine and separated digestive tract content resulting from the emptying or removal of digestive tract,
irrespective of any form of treatment or admixture” (2009). Insects that are reared on the permitted
biological by-products can be used as live insects as bait, as feed for circus animals and to a few other
markets (Aarts et al., 2014). The IPIFF did however not identify these other markets in its article.
Waste products from bio-ethanol production (wheat protein and barley hulls) can be used as a
substrate for insect rearing, since it is listed in the Regulation 68/2013 on the catalogue of feed
materials (2013). Based on the risk of the animal by-products on animal and human health, only
materials from the category with the lowest risks, category 3, can be used to feed livestock, as is
stated in Regulation (EC) 1069/2009 (2009) on animal by-products (Aarts et al., 2014; PROteINSECT,
2013). There are also institutes that claim none of the animal by-product categories are allowed to
be fed to ruminants, poultry and pigs in countries such as England, Scotland and Wales (Gov.uk,
2014). Although catering waste from households and restaurants is included in category 3, it is
prohibited to feed animals with this type of waste in the three aforementioned countries (Gov.uk,
2014). In the Netherlands, companies such as Nijsen-Granico already make use of this classification
of catering waste as category 3 material by producing animal feed for pigs, cows and pets from
catering waste. Manure has been defined as a category 2 material and is therefore prohibited to use
manure in any kind of animal feed. The contradicting statements and findings on the categorization
and restricted use of material from these categories indicates there is ambiguity on what type of (by-
) products are allowed to be fed to different types of animals. Using this categorization of material
according to the Regulation (EC) 1069/2009 (2009), non-pathogenic insects are assumed to be
suitable for livestock feed, since they are classed as category 3 material (Aarts et al., 2014; Huis,
2013).

4. The fourth category consists of insects that are reared on manure and can be used as a derived
product for biodiesel, energy and soil nutrients. Insects from this category are not allowed to be fed
to animals (Aarts et al., 2014).

Future prospects
In response to the barriers insect breeders, scientific researchers, companies and organizations
proposed several strategies and measures. The IPIFF will attempt to stage a debate with the
Directorate General for Health and Consumer Affairs (DG Sanco) and EU member states to resolve
the hindering EC Regulation 999/2001 with regard to the use of PAP of insects fed with former
foodstuff such as meat and fish for pet food and aquaculture. There is a current discussion starting
within the Safety of the Food Chain Committee of DG Sanco on this regulation. Veldkamp et al.
(2012) propose as a strategy to start a lobby on a European level with members of the European
Commission to change the current view on insects. By changing the view on insects, Veldkamp et al.
expect that the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy (TSE) regulation will be changed and that
the ban on the use of insect protein in pig and poultry diets will be lifted. Research should be
conducted on the possible transfer of contaminants from bio-waste products onto insects and from
insect meal onto the animals fed, in order to ensure the health safety of insects reared on bio-waste
to the animals they are fed to (Veldkamp et al., 2012). PROteINSECT proposes that the provision of
evidence by the European Food Safety Authority on the safety of using insect PAP for animal feed will
stimulate a change in legislation that allows to rear insects on animal manure (2013). In addition to
this risk assessment, other measures are needed in order to affect a change in legislation, which will
probably take place in or after 2015 (PROteINSECT, 2013).

From all these regulations and standards it can be concluded that there are still some barriers to
large-scale insect rearing for PAP. The strategies aimed to promote the amendment of the
regulations on insects as animal feed ingredients are directed towards the inclusion of insects as
category 3 material in the EU ABP regulation 1069/2009, when they are proven to be safe. Insect
producers would benefit from more guidance and clarity if clear regulations concerning the rearing,
storage, handling and slaughtering of insects would be implemented (van Huis, 2013). These
strategies, requiring governmental bodies to change the current legislation, should be accompanied
by governmental participation and facilitation in promoting insects as feed ingredients. The
governments should create incentives for the creation of knowledge centers for research, such as the
project PROteINSECT that the European Commission initiated and should assist the private sector in
setting up training programs related to the breeding and processing of insects, such as the 3 million
euro EU FP7 project called “insects as novel sources of protein” that started in 2013 (van Huis, 2013).
It seems that the biggest challenges the insect rearing market is currently facing are to get
governmental bodies on board on the introduction of insects as a source of protein nutrients and
convincing them to make corresponding amendments in legislation.
Legislation outside the EU
Although there is no legislation that mentions the breeding and use of insects in animal feed, Asia is
leading in consuming and rearing insects. Furthermore, in Thailand there are already over 20,000
insect breeders for insects as human food (De Graaf, 2014). China and African countries such as
Congo and Nigeria have a long history of producing insects on a large scale for food and insect
protein (PROteINSECT, 2013; Paun, 2013). In Ghana the production of large-scale insect rearing
facilities is still in progress.

With regard to legislation in African countries, PROteINSECT’s associates in Ghana and Mali indicate
that there is currently no legislation covering the production of insects for the use of insect PAP in
animal feed. Companies are researching the development of animal feed in which insects are used as
a source of protein, which might initiate debate on related legislation. As there currently is no
legislation on whether insects are allowed to be used in animal feed, conferences such as the 18th
biennial conference in Ghana last May are likely to create awareness among governments and
companies on the potential of the large-scale insect rearing.

As opposed to the legislation in the EU, the legislation in China has a passage for “insects and
processed insects” in the Feed Material Catalogue (PROteINSECT, 2013). The related regulation
states that it is only allowed to use dried and crushed insects and de-fatted insect powder from
insects that do not affect human and animal health. The names of the insect species have to be
mentioned in the labeling or packaging to create clarity on the ingredients of the products.

Conclusion
Several categories of insects are allowed to be used in animal feed in the European Union. Insects
that are fed with 100% vegetable feed, which includes eggs and dairy, are allowed to be used as live
insects for pet food, derived insect fat and hydrolyzed insect PAP for pet, aquaculture and pigs and
poultry. Insects that are fed with meat and fish are at the moment not allowed to be fed to pets and
livestock; at the same time several stakeholders take the initiative to convince the European
Commission to change this ban. Insects that are reared on the permitted biological byproducts
mentioned in the EU Animal By-Products Regulation 1069/2009 can be fed as live insects for live bait
and circus animals. Insects are allowed to be reared on waste products from bio-ethanol production
(wheat protein and barley hulls) as live bait and to be fed to circus animals, since it is listed in the
Catalogue of Feed materials. Above all, only non-pathogenic insects that are classed as category 3
material are deemed suitable for livestock feed. At this moment, insects that are reared on manure
as a substrate are prohibited to be used in animal feed, but are allowed to be used as a derived
product for biodiesel, energy and soil nutrients.

For all these applications of insects in animal feed, the EU requires producers to meet the ‘Animal By-
Products Regulation’ 1069/2009 in order to process any category of insect into ‘Processed Animal
Protein’ (PAP). Therefore, novel feed legislation should be implemented in the EU and outside to
release the use of alternative protein sources including insects and other invertebrates. The
optimization of techniques that ensure the quality control of the alternative protein sources will be
necessary for the completion of such regulation. By optimizing the control techniques, microbial,
allergic, parasitical and other chemical hazards will be eliminated and consumers will be keener on
implementing such proteins in their diets (Belluco et al., 2013; Spiegel et al., 2013).
There are no regulations on insect breeding and the use of insects in animal feed in Africa, which is
the reason why several companies are already introducing insect protein into animal feed there. The
legislation in China allows companies to produce dried and crushed insects and de-fatted insect
powder from insect as long as they do not affect human and animal health. In conclusion, as it
seems, companies are able to enter the feed market for breeding insect.

Chapter 7: Competitors
Five forces analysis (M. Porter model)
The Five Forces model by Michael Porter is a useful tool to describe, in general words, the industry
that Company A wants to enter. The model takes threats from new entrants, bargaining buyers,
bargaining suppliers, substitute products and competitors into account. Suppliers were not included
here as they are not relevant in the scenario of this project. Company A will enter the industry of
selling technology and equipment needed to rear insect on a large scale with a high degree of
automatization.

Threat of new entrants

The insect-rearing industry is going through its introductory phase, hence it is uncertain and not fully
explored. As a consequence not a lot of data is available about production costs and trends. Beside
this, incumbents are trying to defend their market share by keeping their knowhow and experience
confidential. Another aspect of the market’s immaturity is that there is room available for new
competitors. At this early stage, in which the product’s potential success is still unknown,
investments are demanded and eventual profits must be reinvested in the business to promote on
the company’s product and to be able differentiate from the competitors.

Barriers to entering the insect rearing industry are mostly based on capital requirement, government
policies and consumers’ attitude.

Firstly, entering the industry of building insect-rearing facilities for Company A means facing costs for
the creation and/or adaptation of basic technology for housing and breeding instruments. In
addition, investments are needed for the implementation of technology concerning the process of
separation of proteins from the insect. For instance, extraction and separation are two processes
required and patents on the knowhow behind protein recovery are already on the market, such as
Chesapeake PERL, Inc. that patented the technology to recover proteins from insect larvae. Those
processes require specialized machinery and skilled, trained workers.

Secondly, government policies are cautious with regards to these scientific breakthroughs. The
scientific world is working to provide governments with the necessary evidence needed to take clear
and uniform decisions to regulate the introduction of insect protein into feed. This topic is addressed
separately under legislation, being the most fundamental barrier to overcome.

Lastly, the final consumers’ behavior and preferences could pose a barrier for Company A to enter
the market, since their approval is fundamental in order to determine the profitability of the insect
rearing sector. At this stage, marketing is essential for the industry’s development since final buyers
must be persuaded and informed about the features and benefits of a product containing insect
protein.
Determinants of buyers’ power
Company A is interested in selling turn-key facilities for insect rearing to the feed industry or feed-
producing companies that are already in the insect-rearing market and that might be interested in
opening a new facility or even branch of production. In both cases Company A can provide the
necessary equipment and technology to rear insects. Moreover, further investigation on global
animal feed compounds is needed (International Feed Industry Federation). In 2010, 720 million tons
of feed were produced, showing that the feed industry is thriving, which creates possibilities for new
suppliers such as insect-rearing companies to enter the market. It is expected this will lead to an
increase in the demand for insect rearing facilities.

Feed-processing companies are interested in new sources of protein to be used as a feed compound
together with the main current sources, being soybean meal, rapeseed and fishmeal.

Insect protein has been shown to have a much higher conversion rate and similar nutritional qualities
compared to that of traditional livestock. The way the insects are produced saves space as the
production of insect protein does not take up as much land as that of the main protein meals. Also,
the prices of the main protein meals continue to rise and there is no such problem for insect protein
(FAO, 2014) which is likely to increase the demand for insect rearing facilities.

Threats of substitute products (soybean meal, rapeseed meal and fish meal)
Substitute sources of protein are taken into account in this research. The selection of these sources is
based on how often they are used as a feed component. Soybean meal, rapeseed meal and fishmeal
are currently the main sources of protein used for feed preparation.

A cost analysis of a large-scale insect-rearing farm is not provided in this study. However, it is
important to compare its costs to the production costs of substitute products, in order to understand
the economical sustainability of a large scale industry. A broader vision of sustainability also includes
environmental, social and nutritional advantages of insect protein compared to those of its
substitutes. Even though insects have a similar amino acid profile to soybean, rapeseed and fish
meal, the increasing price of those substitutes caused by the scarcity of raw materials and to the
increasing awareness of environmental problems, makes insects a viable alternative. To sum up, the
industry’s opportunities and costs need to be defined in order to test the feasibility of the entire
process. A high level of automatization and a large scale production should be achieved in order to
make the business profitable.

Rivalry among existing firms

Important data and findings about competitors are described in a separate chapter and summarized
in tables. The research was conducted with data gathered by the FAO as a starting point.
The market environment of insect-breeding companies includes all kind of businesses that are
producing, processing and/or marketing insects. Within Europe, countries with an active private
sector in this field are Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, Portugal and the Netherlands, with the
Netherlands as market leader. The most important large-scale insect-rearing organization, in terms of
size, is the Dutch trade association of growers and market for insects (Venik) and the French
company Ynsect. Outside Europe, the African company AgriProtein is the pioneer and leader of the
industry, even in comparison to the industry in Europe. Other players in the industry In North and
South America are companies such as Entologics, Enterrafeed and Enviroflight that were concluded
to be the main competitors in that region. It has proven difficult to investigate the Asian market due
to the language barrier and possible other factors unknown.

Given the high rivalry within the insect-rearing industry in all regions at this stage, each company
tends to keep its experience and findings confidential in order to be the first to innovate and to be a
step ahead of their competitors. At the same time, the industry is now developing rapidly, making it
more difficult to produce radical innovations as shown by the speed with which pilot plans, startups
and small scale companies emerged all over the world in recent years.

Product differentiation can be a tool for Company A to step into the market. This can be pursued by
developing and patenting new technologies able to enhance the level of automatization of the whole
process of transforming insects into proteins.

European Scenario
In Europe, the Europe Commission is considering the possibility to sharpen the actual legislative
framework concerning the introduction of insects as a new source of proteins in animal feed. Several
projects, supported by scientific research, came to light aiming to evaluate the effects derived from
this expected change.

PROteINSECT is currently the most important European initiative that embraces the challenge of
researching a new source of protein to feed the increasing world population. Twelve delegates from
seven different countries are aiming, under the coordination of the United Kingdom Food and
Environment Research Agency (FERA), to reduce existing legal barriers to the introduction of insects
as feed component. At the same time, they are investigating the efficacy and safety of using insect
protein as a protein source for animal feed. The ongoing research is focused on two insect species:
the black soldier fly and the housefly.

Other European projects and organizations are showing interest in this topic as well. One of these
European projects is called ‘Desirable’, founded by the French National Research Agency. The aim of
this project is to depict the features of a sustainable insect bio refinery, used to obtain protein
materials, fats and chitin from the black soldier fly and to reintroduce these back into the food chain,
or in the case of chitin into new manufacturing chains. Moreover, experts are supervising lab and
pilot-scale experiments at all stages of the process, including insect rearing, insect transformation
and meal formulation.

BIOCONVAL is a project developed by the Technical University of Denmark in collaboration with the
Dansk Teknologisk Institut, the Knowledge Center for Agriculture and the Aarhus University to
develop and demonstrate a system to produce feed supplements consisting of live insect larvae with
an ideal amino acid composition.

IPIFF is a European organization representing the interests of the insect breeders for feed and food.
The objective is to find standards and best practices that can be applied to the insect rearing
industry. Moreover, they encourage open collaboration and research among companies within the
same industry. Among the members of this organization which are located all around the globe, are
companies such as AgriProtein, Hermetia, Protix, Koppert, Ynsect and Entologics.
Insect producing companies in the EU
In this chapter the insect producing companies will be discussed per country, to provide an overview
on the current insect rearing market. Firstly, the collaborations of several companies will be covered.
A brief description of these collaborations will give an indication on the kind of companies that are
included and the main interest of these associations. Secondly, with the use of tables the companies
that are connected to the associations will be mentioned. The type(s) of insects they rear, the types
of substrate used for rearing, the technology used and the final products that are made from the
insects will be provided for the companies that provided relevant information on their websites.

Fig. 5 Map of Europe showing major competitors in the region.

The Netherlands
One of the groups researching insects as feed and food, is the Entomology Laboratory of the Plant
Science Group at Wageningen University, which resulted in the book “Edible insects, future prospects
for food and feed security”, written in collaboration with the FAO in 2013. This constitutes a pillar for
new research. Therefore, these scientists can be considered as pioneers in this branch of research.

The relationship of the Netherlands with the insect rearing industry is expressed through the
flourishing number of insect rearing facilities.
InsectCentre

The International InsectCentre (IIC) is an important institute in the Netherlands. It is an international

cooperative composed of over 15 companies, universities and governmental agencies. The main
interest of the association is to promote the application of insects and insect larvae as a protein rich
resource for feed, food and the pharmaceutical
pharmaceutic industry.

The Venik

The Venik (Verenigde Nederlandse Insectenkwekers)

wekers) is a Dutch trade association that connects
c
growers and markets for insect consumption, for both feed and food. The organization stimulates the
production of insects in accordance to the standards established by the General Food Law of the
European Commission. Those standards are implemented by its members in order to guarantee the
quality of the final product. Venik also collaborates with governmental and research institutes and
will launch its own quality mark by the end of 2014.
2014 Among the company that represent Venik,
ProtixBiosystems is one of the most important in terms of size, followed by Jagram and Kreca.
Protix implemented a large scale production of insects with the use of advanced
advanced equipment. It is also
involved in the EU initiative “International Producers of Insects for Feed and Food” (IPIFF) to
contribute to the persuasion the European Commission to make amendments in regulations. The end
product is targeted toward feed meals
als for aquaculture and livestock.
Jagram is a Dutch rearing company located in Hillegom, mainly focused on rearing horseflies. They
breed insects as a source of proteins for the feed industry. Kreca was established in 1978 in the
Netherlands and operates throughout Europe with the rearing of more than twelve species of
insects. Moreover, the company is authorized by the Dutch food authority nVWA to breed for human
consumption.

All the companies that are adjoined in Venik will be listed below before being further discussed.
discussed

The Association of Dutch Insect producers (Venik) is composed of:

1. Protix
2. Ngn
3. Jagram
4. Kreca
5. Van de Ven
6. Nostimos
7. Vivara
8. Meertens
9. Tasty Bugs
Table 30 List of companies, insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information

Name of company: Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional

Information:
1. Protix Fly eggs and larvae -Whole insects Feedstuff
Biosystems: -Insect protein coming - GMP+
meal from waste
-Purified insect oil suppliers -Fat extraction
and lipids (from the technology (no
-Chitin and Chitin food solvents)
derivatives production
-Whole insects sector) -Ultra-mild
-Insect Fertilizer drying
pellets methodology
to ensure the
amino acid
digestibility
remains high

2. NGN New Mealworms

Generation
Nutrition

3. Jagran: Feed, food and Organic The extraction

pharmaceutical waste and isolation of
products nutrients from
insects and up
scaling of the
processes to
industrial
scale.
4. Kreca: -Mealworms -Living insects
 -Buffalo worms -Freeze dried
-Morio worms insects
-House crickets -Deep frozen
-Grasshoppers products
-Red runners -Vitamin
-BSF preparation
-Pinkies (pink larvae)
-Wax months

Living insects
-Tebo larvae
-Dola
-Fruit flies
- Housefly
-Springtails
-Earth worms
-Silk worm
5. Insectenkwek -Mealworms Frozen Food GMP Freeze dried
erij Van De -Buffalo worms products & nutrition. and blanched
Ven: -Morio worms Freeze-dried Besides insects.
-Crickets - products food, no
Grasshoppers hormones,
Mainly for: pesticides
-Fish or other
-Reptiles unnatural
-Birds products
-Bait for fishing are added.
6. Nostimos BV Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown

7. Vivara: - (Live and freeze Birds Live or freeze

dried) mealworms dried
- Buffalo worms
- Morio worms
8. Meertens -Grasshoppers (adult, Mainly for: Feeding Freeze dried
medium and small) -Reptiles grass and
-Locusts -Birds other
-Mammals natural and
vegetable
products
9. Tasty bugs Living insects: Dried or live
-Mealworms
-Morio_worms
-Grasshoppers

Dried insects:
-Meal worms
- Buffalo Worm
-Silk worms
-Gammarus
-Shrimp
The following Dutch companies are insects producing farms for animals that are not represented by
Venik.

Table 31 List of companies, insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information

Name of company: Insect reared: End- Substrate: Additional

product: Information:
Viwo -Mealworm
-Live bait
- Morio worm
-Dendrobaena (earthworm)
-Lumbricus_terrestris
(earthworm)
-Eisenia fetida (earthworm)
-Maggots, natural and
colored
-House-crickets
-Black field crickets
-Locusts.

-Worm manure
Meelwormkwekerij -Mealworm
-Giant mealworms

Bugs for Pets -Grasshoppers Pet_food

-Mealworms
-Silkworms
Didier Boestoen Worms:
-Mealworms (small/
medium - large)
-Morio worms
-Dola larvae
-Wax worms
-Earth Worms
-Dendrobena earthworms
-Canadian Dower

Crickets:
-House crickets
-Silent Assimilis
-Field crickets

Flies:
-Fruit flies
-Springtails
-Houseflies

Cockroach:
-Red runners (subadults)
 -Dubias
Dubias (adults)

Spain

BioflyTech

Created in 2012, BioflyTech is a spin-off

spin of the University of Alicante. The company is specialized in
rearing insects of the families of the Calliphoridae, Muscidae, Syrphidae and Stratiomyidae and is
actively engaged in the research and development of technologies related to artificial insect rearing
products. One of the company
pany divisions is called BioflyFeed,
BioflyFeed, which produces biomass for animal feed.
Bioflytech is involved in many projects for the development
evelopment of this new industry such as the
European project, PROteINSECT and collaborates with FAO and the European Commission.

Table 32 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

-Lucilia sericata
-Hermetia illucens
-Musca domestica
-Calliphoravicina -
Eristalistenax
Biomass for animal Multiple sub- They copy the natural process of
feed products or biotransformation by larvae of
organic waste dipterans (flies)

MealFood Europe

MealFood Europe is a Spanish

nish farm specialized in breeding and selling Tenebrio molitor.
molitor The farm is
dependent on its sophisticated infrastructures and highly qualified and experienced human resources
resource
in the sector of livestock
vestock and pest management. Mealfood Europe provides feed alternatives for
poultry, aquaculture, sport fishes and pets and provides alternatives for the production of fertilizers.

Table 33 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

Mealworms -Live larvae
-Tenebrio
Tenebrio molitor
-Chitin-rich
rich dust
-Solid
Solid fertilizer
 -Grease
Grease for technical use

Insagri

Insagri was established in 2012 in Coín, a municipality in the southern Spanish province of Málaga.
The company is committed to the use,, marketing and distribution of livestock insects for the
transformation into powders and food, chemicals and aquaculture products.products The number of
employees of the company ranges between 11 and 50 for a turnover of more than € 3 million, gained
from their 280 m²of warehouse.

Table 34 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the
t company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

-Black soldier Flour Dehydration
flies
-Mealworm
larvae

Entomotech

Entomotech is a research institute located in Almería. Their expertise is related to the development
of new technologies for insect mass rearing and for a wide range of other biotechnological use. The
core business of the company is to provide customers with entomological services, namely
biotechnological tools for the production
productio process, or for the end product for biotechnology,
chemistry and pharmaceutical purpose,
purpose or for the agricultural food business.

Portugal

Sparos

Sparos is a spin-off
off of the Centre of Marine Sciences of Algarve (CCMAR) within the University of
Algarve, located in the South of Portugal. The company’s objective is to research and develop
innovative solutions and processes for fish feeding and nutrition.
nutrition. The team of experts provides its
clients with a pilot scale feed technology platform that can be used in the aquaculture sector.

Table 35 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

-Technology
Technology platform to -Extrusion
manufacture feed at pilot -Vacuum
Vacuum coating
scale -Spray
-Drying
-Feed
Feed batches for fish -Fluidized
-Bed
ed encapsulation

France

NextAlim

NextAlim
lim is a French start up located in Paris. The company began in 2014 with a social capital of
10,000 euro.

Table 36 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

addi information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

-Black Soldier Insects proteins for Organic waste

-Flies Crystals for animal feed
and oils for industry

Khepri

Khepri is a decentralized company that relies on a network of producers located in different

countries. Their first and currently only insect rearing farm is located in Cambodia. The goal of the
business is to sell a complete kit (breeding cages) to farmers,
farmers in exchange theyy ask a portion of the
insect
ct produced. From the insects
insect collected Khepri aims to produce feed or pet food. In this way each
producer breeding crickets will contribute to the development of the businesses whose earnings will
be shared. Up to now partners are located in emerging countries
countries such as Vietnam. In collaboration
with producers, the company has created a kind of contract called “contract farming” meaning that
financial instruments or commodities are traded for immediate delivery. These farmers
f agreed to
produce according to the
he buyers standards,
standards while the buyer invests in training and equipment for the
farm. The farmers aim to stabilize their yields, keep ownership of their land, reduce the relative risks
of production, obtain supplies and technical support, gain access to the market and to improve
production.

Table 37 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the compan
company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

Crickets -Breeding
Breeding Cages The company Insects are mixed and then they
-Flour provides are put into a centrifuge to
farmers with separate the shell from the
insect food flesh and finally dehydrated in
an oven.

Ynsect

Ynsect was developed in 2011 from the French incubator Agoravov and is involved in a project called
“Desirable”. In 2013 the company started its lab scale production using also Greenpole facilities and
received a grant of 3 million euro by Bpi
pi France in 2014. They focus on different sectors namely,
animal feed (for aquaculture), pet food, human nutrition, plant nutrition, nutraceuticals and green
chemistry.

Table 38 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

-Beetles Insect based feed Organic
-Flies substrates,
such as cereal
by-products.

Germany

Hermetia

Hermetia is the only company in Germany that rears insects. The group, founded in 2005, aims to
introduce alternative feed component to fish meal. The company currently consists of three
branches with different tasks: Hermetia feed GbR is involved in research
research and development,
HermetiaBaruth GmbH is the first production site while Hermetia Germany GmbH & Co KG takes care
of the marketing, sales and administration of the company. In addition, they provide expertise and
support to farmers, for instance the partnership they established with Entologics. The research was
funded by the Ministry of Economy of the state of Brandenburg and was supported by the European
Union.

Table 39 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

Black soldier fly -Flour (fish meal -Wheat bran
larvae alternative) -Green waste
-Insect proteins

Iceland

Víur
Viur is a company located in Iceland, Bolungarvik. The company started in 2013 but is not yet in the
market.

Table 40 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company

Insect reared: End product: Substrate: Additional information

Black soldier fly Feed for aquaculture Organic waste
larvae

Switzerland

Protein Synergy SA
Protein Synergy SA, is a Swiss company that in 2012 entered the market of “Protein Mini-Livestock”
for the food and feed industry. Given the high potentiality of this sector they provide and develop
market opportunities for edible insects and to promote rearing and processing facilities for feed and
food.

Insect producing companies outside the EU

Outside Europe the scenario about the insect industry is heterogeneous, because of the differing
legislation applied around the world. The tables below will summarize data for each country
separately.

Institutes are more frequently beginning to support research and organizations in various forms all
over the globe. Some examples of this link between farmers and institutions were clear while
investigating the history of the most relevant companies listed below.

An example of a funding agency is Wheatsheaf Investments Ltd. The agency has been established by
the Grosvenor Estate, a privately owned property group active in some of the world’s most dynamic
cities. Wheatsheaf’s mission is to fund and invest in projects that will contribute to face global
challenges.

Open Bug Farm is another platform that stimulates the interaction between farmers, researchers and
hobbyists who want to feed the increasing population with edible insects. Open Bug Farm is based on
an open source technology, thus, receiving constant improvements from a community of innovative
farmers. At the same time, the portal gives anyone the possibility to buy a basic kit useful to start to
build a home scale insect farm.

The major players of the insect rearing industry are described in

in the following pages. First, a general
picture of the company is provided, describing the field of action and the mission of each company.
Afterwards, a table summarizess the most important features collected for each company where
available, including the type of insect reared, the kind of substrate used, the final product obtained
and additional information on the technology used. The continents and countries of South Africa,
South America, Cambodia, United States, Canada and China are covered in this chapter.
cha

Fig. 6 World map showing major competitors.

South Africa

AgriProtein

AgriProtein is working on insect based protein since 2009 and is currently the leading commercial fly
farm. The farm is located in South Africa, near Cape Town, where clear legislation on insect breeding
is currently absent. AgriProtein won the African Innovation Foundation’s Prize and has raised $11
million to be invested in building thirty eight new plants all over the world, in addition to the two
existing ones in South Africa.
frica. The actual production consists of 8.5 billion flies that are being fed on
more than 110 tons of rotting food and waste.

Table 41 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the compan
company
Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:
-Black soldier -MagOil Organic food The waste is blended into a feed mix for
fly -Mag Meal waste: the fly larvae. This waste is pre-treated
pre
-Blowfly -MagSoil -Spoiled or to remove any non-food
non items such as
-Common -Whole
Whole Dried Larvae leftover food metal, glass or plastics that have crept
housefly -Manure in. It is also dried to reduce the water
-Abattoir waste content.

Sources Within the factory,

ory, 300 fly cages are
include: designed to maximize mating. Each cage
uneaten contains water systems for the flies
catering- (ensuring they don't drown).
industry waste Temperature, humidity and lighting are
from airlines, also closely controlled to promote their
restaurants egg-laying.
and hotels, as
well as offal Laying areas in large cages are designed
de
from abattoirs to be attractive to the flies and they lay
and animal all their eggs in one place. All the eggs
manure. have to be at exactly the same stage of
development before they feed, so the
larvae don't kill each other when they
hatch.

As the larvae grow, they will consume all

al
the waste allocated to them by batch. At
the end of the growth stage, the larvae
are mechanically separated from any
waste residue.

They are then dried, crushed to extract

oil (MagOil, rich in fatty acids) and milled
into a flaked product for delivery to t
animal feed mills. This provides the
protein element for feeding farmed
animals such as chicken, fish and pigs.

Dried and the resulting protein

compressed into pellets.

South America

Entologics
Entologics is a Brazilian firm located in São Paulo. The core business of the company is the use of
insects to transform organic waste into insect meal that is a feed ingredient suitable for fish, poultry
and hog diet and compost to feed soil and plants. Additionally they hey created a partnership with
Hermetia, a German company, providing expertise, support and exclusive license to use their
production process. Entologics raised funds from the web
w portal called ImpactCrowd.
Crowd.

Table 42 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

addi information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Black soldier -Insect Meal (Collected) 1. Waste
fly -Organic
Organic Compost industrial 2. Conditioning
organic waste 3. Storage
4. Formulation
5. Bioreactors
6. Processing
7. Sales

NutrInsecta

NutrInsecta is the largest producer of insects in Brazil,

Brazil, located in Vale Verde. They obtained a
certification from the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply to manufacture ingredients
for animal feed.
eed. Although the target of this industry are mainly pets, such as reptiles, birds and
mammals they have the expertise to switch to other
othe interesting markets as well.

Table 43 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the compan
company

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

-Cockroach Dehydrated: Feed from whole, fragmented
-Cricket -Cockroach or ground insects
-Housefly -Field cricket
-Mealworm -Housefly larvae
-Housefly pupae
-Common mealworm
ealworm
-(Giant
(Giant mealworms)

Cambodia

Co-Prot
Co-Prot is a startup association consisting of a network of insect producers and a central processing
center that standardizes and controls the quality of the end product. The company aims to
manufacture, processes, trade and commercialize insect based feed meal. Their pilot farm is in Siem
Reap, Cambodia (Siem Reap), however the first commercial quantities are expected at the end of
2015.

Table 44 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

add information on the compan
ny

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Black soldier Starting
tarting from 2015: GMP+
fly larvae -Hermetia illucens Meal
-Biodiesel

United States

EnviroFlight

EnviroFlight was founded in 2009 in Ohio (Yellow spring). In a 20,000 square-foot

foot complex they rear
300 tons of black soldier fly larvae feed per year. Insects are contained in large bins and each bin
produces roughly 40 pounds of live insects every 10 days. Ten full time employees take care of the
breeding, milling and
nd product testing. The company has been operating at a profitable level
lev since the
fall of 2013, selling insect-based
based meal to zoos and pet-food
pet food makers. EnviroFlight also packages and
sells the larvae waste as an all-natural
natural fertilizer.

Table 45 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

add information on the compan
ny

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Black soldier - Protein meal for fish. -Co-product from Cooked, dried and converted
fly larvae - Yellow Springs natural breweries, ethanol into a meal that is 40% protein
plant food production and 46% fat.
-Pre-consumer food Oils can be extracted, which
waste. For example boosts the protein content to
scraps from big above 70%.
food manufacturing
facilities. Prevention of ammonia creation
They do not process in the frass by stabilizing the
post-consumer material immediately after the
waste streams, insect larvae consumes the
septic waste, or feedstock.
animal manure
AspireFG

Aspire Food Group was founded in 2012 by a group of MBA students that won the Hult Prize. The
company consists of a 13,000 square foot area located in Texas (Creedmoor).
(Creedm or). The business is active in
three markets with the objective to rear, process and market edible insects worldwide,
w namely
Mexico, Ghana and the United States. They established a centralized production of local insects and
incentivized training for small farmers to enable them to produce their own insects. Moreover, they
built a distribution network through local
lo distributors.

Table 46 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

-Grasshoppers -Fine
Fine milled cricked USDA Certified Freeze
-Crickets powder (Milled Aketta) Organic feed Roasted
-Whole cricket

Organic Value Recovery

Organic Value Recovery Solution is an organic waste processing company based in Georgia. Their
process was picked as one of the top 3 processes in the NOAA/USDA Alternative Feeds study.

Table 47 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Black soldier -Insect bio-mass
mass energy -Waste foods The end protein product can be
fly larvae meal (conversion is -Green Wastes - personalized to meet animal
approximately 25% on a Manufacturing feeding requirements with the
“dry to dry” matter basis residuals -Fish additions of Omega-
Omega 3s, or other
for most waste streams). offal ingredients.
-Meat and dairy
-Soil
Soil amendment compost. wastes -Manures -
including swine,
-Dried
Dried and milled black poultry and others
soldier fly larvae -Brewer's Grains
-Palm Kernel Meal
-Other organic
wastes
-Waste streams
can be combined
 ESR International
ESR International

ESR International
nternational is a company located in Dallas, Texas involved in the food waste disposing process
and looks for efficient recycling systems. The website biopod.com is owned by ESR specialized in
extracting value from food waste. They patented the BioPod™ Plus, which is a special bin to grow
blackk soldier flies on organic waste.

Table 48 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the compan
company

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Black soldier Biopod: black soldier fly Organic waste ESR developed and patented a
flies bioconversion unit in unique bioconversion process
polyethylene that results in a 95% reduction
garbage bins, but these bins in weight and volume of food
(US patent 6,780,637) waste within a matter of just a
few hours.ours. This process
requires no energy, no
electricity, no chemicals, not
even water.
water

Fly Farm System

Fly Farm System is a company located in Oregon, founded in 1975. Their core business is rearing
house flies.

Table 49 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

Housefly Housefly live, dried, A variety of organic A patent on the techniques and
frozen, whole, liquefied, materials and apparatus of its proprietary insect
ground, pelletized, agricultural wastes husbandry system is currently
flaked and loaded. can be used as pending.
grow substrate.

Armstrong’s cricket farms

Armstrong is an American firm set up in 1947 in Georgia.

Table 50 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product:

product: Substrate: Additional Information:
-Worms -Live
Live Crickets of different All natural grain
-Crickets size products
(Acheta
domestica) Cricket Chow
-Cricket
-Cricket
Cricket Water Bites
-Cricket
Cricket Total Bites

-Live
Live worms (meal worms,
wax worms and super
worms)

Canada

Next Millennium

Next Millennium is a family owned Canadian Company. They are currently working with national and
international
nternational partners such as leading Canadian universities and Canadian food chain suppliers and
farmers, to help the diffusion of the newest biotechnology and to bring their vision on their so-called
so
“Geoentomophagy” into the mainstream. They T are researching the laws considering the import and
export and the requirements related to insect trade. They support their sales by providing new
recipes and insights on entomology.

Table 51 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

-Worm -Protein-infused
infused High quality
-Cricket livestock feed. grain feed
-Worm
Worm and Cricket
Protein Powders
-Roasted
Roasted Insects
-Live insects
-Frozen
Frozen insects

Enterra Feed Corporation

Enterra Feed Corporation is a company set up in 2007, operating in Vancouver, Canada and produces
feed ingredients for animals, such as aquaculture and pets. In addition, Enterra Feed offers a service
for the collection and transportation of traceable organics coming from grocery stores,
store markets, food
processors and food distributors to their facilities. The goal of the firm for
or 2014 is to transform per
day 100 tonss of waste and rotten food into feed and after that they aim to expand the operations to
other locations in order to process 1,000 tons of waste per day by 2016. The firm started with an
initial investment of $5 million from the in UK-based Wheatsheaf Investments.

Table 52 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional

additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

-Black soldier Feed ingredients: Pre-consumer Hatchery process can
fly larvae -Dried
Dried BSF Larvae organics waste process large quantities of
-Enterra Meal feedstock (natural nursery).
nursery)
-Enterra
Enterra Natural Oil Source:
-Fertilizer Grocery stores,
-Dried,
Dried, pasteurized markets, food
grubs distributors
and food
processors.
NOT accept
household or
institutional
food waste,
yard waste,
garbage or
manure.

OfBug

OfBug is a Canadian company located in Vancouver

Vancouver that produces, as they state it, “ento proteins”
which are the insect proteins for animal feed.

Table 53 List of insect reared, end products, substrate and additional information on the company
compan

Insect reared: End-product: Substrate: Additional Information:

-Black soldier Feed ingredients: -Black soldier flies:
fly larvae yellow mealworm and pre-consumer,
-Mealworms black soldier fly larvae in clean, traceable
a whole, flaked or food waste
ground -Mealworms: pre-
consumer beer
grains sourced
from Granville
Island Brewery
and White Rock
Brewing Company
China
China has the entomophagous tradition since ancient times of eating insects as part of Chinese diets.
Children are used to insect as a regular meal already in their early years. Besides the use of insects as
food, insects are considered a valid source for medicine and cosmetics. Regardless of the final goal,
insect farms are becoming larger and widespread. It is stated that roughly 100 companies are
currently rearing insects. However, it is difficult to identify them and to have access to data
concerning the species they are rearing and methods adopted. When searching for this data on the
internet, it is possible to find some information in these insect rearing companies, which as starting
point the newspapers that publish on insects. The attracting attention of media started in August,
when a million cockroaches escaped from a farm in neighboring Jiangsu province. The “Great
Escape”, as it was described in newspapers, was the main issue that stimulated the publication of
news on insect producers. From this first research it is possible to find names of the major producers.

Wang Fuming is a Chinese grower that since 2010 owns six farms, in Jinan, where he already reared
almost 10 million cockroaches. These insects are sold to producers of Asian medicine and to cosmetic
companies that use insects as an affordable source of protein and that recover cellulose material
from their wings. In his farms he is currently breeding Periplaneta americana, or American cockroach.
He uses a simple process to kill them: scooping or eradicating them from their nests and dunk them
in a big vat of boiling water. After that they're dried in the sun and sold.

Starting in 2009 in Kunming, the capital of the southwestern province of Yunnan, Li Jinsui invested in
building an insect rearing facility. His interest is mainly directed to breeding the housefly and he
already has seven patents. At the beginning he invested 250,000 euros of his own money in this
insect factory. Li states he is willing to open more factories and develop new techniques on the 27
hectares of land he bought, in order to become the leader once the market of insect will open.

Wang Pengsheng is a farmer financed by venture capitalists and recently started his operations in
producing cockroaches, as reported by Discovery News. With his operations, he aims to enter the
market of Chinese medicine.

Conclusions
A total of 21 companies have been analyzed and categorized on the basis where they are located. A
brief summary of the results of this analysis is also shown in Fig. 6. It seems that the black soldier fly
is the most widely reared insect both inside and outside Europe. As substrate, the majority of
companies outside the EU make use of organic waste while in Europe, due to the strict legislation,
other substrates are more commonly used.

Chapter 8: Communication
There are several barriers that hinder insect breeders from building large industrial-scale plants. The
lack of awareness among potential buyers of insect products is one of them. Likewise, the perception
that insects are unsanitary doesn’t create a positive attitude towards the use of insects in livestock
feed and makes it more difficult to market insect-based animal feed (Van Huis, 2013).

This first part of this chapter addresses why there is a need for a positive image for companies who
integrate insects into the feed supply chain and what current the current interest in the topic is. This
will be discussed under the headers of “consumer acceptance” and “consumer interest”. The second
part addresses how companies who are currently already in this sector have dealt and are dealing
with this challenge. This will be addressed under the headers of “Stakeholders’ communication on
insect in food and feed”.

Consumer acceptance
The acceptance of consumers of insect meal in the feed of the livestock they eat, is both problematic
and crucial to insect-rearing companies operating within the spheres of western cultural influence.
The problematic nature of consumer acceptance of insect-fed livestock lies in the fact that insects are
not regularly eaten in western countries and are generally viewed as disgusting. The other fact is that
insects are usually only in the public view as vectors of disease, as a plague or as a pest. These two
representations of insects are strongly negative and do not help companies trying to sell livestock
that was fed on insects. Consumer acceptance of insect fed livestock is crucial because the end
consumer decides if the product is worth buying or not. If consumers view a product such as insect-
fed livestock meat as inferior, gross, dangerous or unethical in comparison to competitive products
such as soybean meal-fed livestock meat, the product will not sell well.

In their current stage, insect rearing companies should try to pay attention to the communication on
the use of insect protein in animal feed. The communication includes persuading consumers to buy
animal products fed with insects-based feed. Moreover, communication via media, advertisement
and government bulletins should be addressed very carefully. It is clear from the results obtained by
a PROteINSECT survey from 2014 that 55% of news coverage related to the topic of insects as food or
feed showed a positive approach or attitude towards the subject at hand (PROteINSECT, 2014).

Likewise, PROteINSECT also collected consumers’ opinions by performing a survey on 1302

respondents of both genders, different ages and 71 countries of residence (2014). One of the findings
indicated that 72% of the respondents are willing to buy fish, chicken or pork that has been fed on a
diet containing insect protein. These results indicate that there is potential of a future business, as
there is a large group of people interested in buying insect-fed meat. The survey’s results also
suggest that the presence of insects protein should be specified in the label of the product, as 57.2%
of the surveyed indicated this to be important. The main concern of the respondents, as drawn from
selected comments, was focused on the safety and ethics of the process, as well as the end product’s
price. Public engagement is needed to increase awareness on this topic (PROteINSECT, 2014).

In addition to consumer acceptance, the composition of consumers’ diets is also relevant for the
level of demand for insects based food components. Often, diets change rapidly due to globalization,
as it did with the introduction of sushi, which first had to face cultural barriers in western countries
before becoming generally accepted. This is the case for all new types of food, it is therefore
expected that as soon as the products of animals fed with insects hit the market, consumers will buy
them if they view them as a positive change (Van Huis et al., 2013)).

Consumer interest
The majority of people are likely to instinctively reject unfamiliar or new food items such as insects.
The term “Yuck factor” was introduced by Pennsylvania University bioethicist Dr. Caplan to describe
the influence of instinctive attitudes towards new technology. This factor can also be applied to
describe the aversion to the introduction of insects as an alternative protein source. This cultural
barrier can be overcome by informing people about the benefits of these insects. There is a growing
interest in edible insects. Evidence for this trend can be found by investigating the amount of
searches conducted by people on the web, which is considered a measure of the interest in the topic
of edible insects.

Using Google Trends it is possible to look back to periods when certain words, or a combination of
words were frequently looked for. These results give an impression on the trends in consumers’
interest in insects. The research was focused on three key word combinations: “food insect”,
“entomophagy” and “edible insects”. The different word combinations gave different results in terms
of interest regarding time and the location of users. Considering the word combinations of “food
insect” and “edible insects” are in English, it is evident that the majority of the people that looked for
them are from English speaking countries as Australia, Canada, the United States, the United
Kingdom and India.

The map in Fig. 7 shows in what countries people searched for the term “entomophagy”. These
results show a high occurrence of the use of this search term in Japan in comparison its use in
Mexico, the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada and France. These results reveal
that the interest in this topic is highest in Japan, though it should not be forgotten that other
countries might rather use alternative terms instead.

Fig.7 Regional overview of people looking for the term “entomophagy”

Stakeholders’ communication on insects in food and feed

Many attempts are being made to promote the use of insects in feed and food, by doing research
and communicating on the possibilities. The four well-known P’s, ‘Price’, Product’, ‘Promotion’ and
‘Place’ of the Marketing Mix can be used as a business tool for the marketing of the insect products.
Considering the aim of this paper, the two P’s of ‘Product’ and ‘Promotion’ are further discussed.

‘Product’ stands for the many features the insect products have. Research is still being conducted to
see how and in what form the insects can be used in food and feed. In the competitor section of this
paper it has been demonstrated that many private companies, research centers, NGOs and
governments are working on the development of (large-scale) insect breeding facilities. Numerous
insect species and possibilities to market insects as food and feed have already been introduced to
the market. Still, plenty of research is conducted on many other insects and their application in food
and feed. The appearance of the insects and insect-based food affects consumers’ attitude towards
insects in their food and possibly in animal feed. The examination of consumer preferences with
regards to the use of insects influences the way in which the insects can be presented as food and
processed products. The ‘Promotion’ part of the marketing mix focuses on the presentation of the
product and its features to the public by the use of different communication channels.
The first part of this chapter discusses the efforts of many stakeholders in communicating on the
research that has been done, the findings that have been generated and the potential of insects as
food and feed ingredients. These stakeholders communicate on the use of insects in animal feed, but
mainly on the use of insects as food. The second part of the chapter specifically discusses the way
companies are communicating on their insect food products.

Communication types
The European Commission is currently engaged in the promotion of insects as an alternative protein
source as they invested 3 million euro’s in supporting research on the potential of insects for
consumption. Wageningen University’s Laboratory of Entomology is one of the institutes conducting
research on the introduction of edible insects to a broad public. Their findings and those of other
researchers on the environmental, nutritional and sustainable benefits of insect food and feed have
been presented via the many communication channels of articles, papers, books, documentaries,
presentations, news articles and conferences. All of these have been distributed over the entire
world.

Books
The Wageningen University Laboratory of Entomology published a paper on edible insects titled
“Future prospects for food and feed security” in collaboration with the Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (Van Huis et al., 2013). This extensive paper discusses the
importance and potential of insect products and the current situation with regards to market
developments, legislation and barriers in insect breeding. Due to its size and the topics it covers, this
article is designed more for other interested stakeholders in the insect breeding market rather than
for the general public. Starting in early 2015, Wageningen Academic Publishers will issue a quarterly
online journal called the ‘Journal of Insects as Food and Feed’ which will cover the whole chain of
edible insects from harvesting in the wild up to the selling of insects on the consumer market
(Wageningenacademic.com, 2014). The many aspects related to edible insects will be covered and
interested parties are invited to contribute by submitting innovative findings and solutions that could
be covered in the journal. In addition to the reports extensively elaborating on the potential of
insects as food and feed, there are several other communication channels used to spread the word
on insects.

In 2014 entomologists Dicke and Van Huis published “The Insect Cookbook: Food for a Sustainable
Planet” together with chef Henk van Gurp (Van Huis, Gurp & Dicke, 2014). Their Dutch edition was
already a success and encouraged them to make an English version to reach a broader, worldwide
audience. On an international level, the general public’s interest in edible insects appears to be
piqued as the English version of the book has recently been awarded first place for cookbooks at the
2014 San Francisco Green Book Festival (Wageningen UR, 2014). By presenting the possibilities of
edible insect in the form of recipes, the authors attempt to create more awareness and acceptance
of edible insects among citizens around the globe. To incite stakeholders other than the general
public as well, researchers from universities and other organizations wrote several papers and
scientific articles on edible insects and insects as a feed component.
Documentaries and presentations

In 2010, the Wageningen University entomologist Arnold van Huis elaborated on the potential of
using edible insectss and insect feed to combat the increasing demand of meat in the world in a
French documentary called “Global Steak” (Wikipedia, 2014).. In the same year his colleague Marcel
Dicke made an, according to the non-profit
non profit organization TED, “appetizing case for adding insects to
everyone’s diet” called “Why not eat insects?” (Dicke,2010).
(Dicke,2010). The video has been watched over a
million times by interested viewers in 32 languages. In his presentation, Dicke explained the potential
of edible insects and the presence of insects
insects in many food products that people are likely to be
unaware of. The benefits on health, the environment, sustainability, the conversation rate and the
nutritional value of the insects were all covered in the conference. The way the entomologists
elaborated
orated on the use of insects is different from the approach used in many (scientific) papers. With
the use of numerous jokes, images and videos he informed a broad audience that insects can be
processed in food and that they can be eaten as a delicacy in restaurants
restaurants as well. Considering this
presentation has been viewed many times on the internet, it is assumed that this way of promoting
edible insects is reaching a broad audience and could be implemented by companies and
governments in a similar way.

The potential
otential of edible insects has gained international media coverage during showcases,
presentations and conferences as well. During his visit to the Dutch Embassy in Washington, Dicke
explained the benefits that insects can have as an alternative to meat (Wageningen
(Wageningen UR, 2013). Other
events giving researchers a platform to share their knowledge were also organized, conferences
being an example.

Conferences
In 2014 the first international
conference “Insects to feed the world”,
organized by Wageningen University
and the FAO was held in Wageningen
to create awareness and to showcase
the potential of insects as an
alternative protein solution. The
conference
onference was also used to assess the
constraints insects breeders are
currently facing (FAO, 2014). At this
conference researchers from the
university demonstrated the protein
extraction process from insects on site
(Fig. 8).

The workshops given at Wageningen Fig. 8 The process of protein extraction at the Wageningen university
“Insects to feed the world” conference.

Fig. 9 A cricket recipe from the National

Post.
University in 2012 aimed to identify the opportunities and
threats for large-scale
scale insect breeding for the acceptance of
insect protein as an alternative protein solution. Visitors
included insect breeders, stakeholders in the feed industry and
biomass and waste processors (Wageningen UR, 2012). In
America, initiatives comparable with the ones in Wageningen
have been organized as well. In August 2014, the Future Food
Salon Group organized the “Eating Innovation Conference” in
Montreal, which was the first international multidisciplinary
conference in North America on entomophagy and which lasted
three days (Futurefoodsalongroup.com, 2014). Both the Dutch
and American conferences were sponsored by several
organizations working to further the development
devel of insect as
food and feed, which allow companies to become involved in the insect industry.

News_and_articles
Some of the conferences on the potential of insects as food and as feed ingredients have been
promoted by newspaper and news website articles. articles. Industry related news websites like the City
Farmer News promoted conferences as the ‘Insects to Feed the World’ conference held in
Wageningen in 2014 (Cityfarmer.info, 2014). The Canadian conference on edible insects held in
Montreal was promoted in an article published in the National Post (Hamilton, 2014). The Post
covered the importance of edible insects, introduced the conference speakers and depicted the
cricket recipe shown in Fig. 9. This website made use of pictures of insects and food with insects
in as
ingredients, rather than pictures of insects as an animal feed ingredient.

Newspapers and news websites published articles on the he use of edible insects as well, including the
opinions of researchers and experts that were not necessarily mentioned in conferences. The Post
published an article called “Are you ready to eat bug?” which discussed the many benefits that edible
insects have,
ave, accompanied by two pictures on the use
of insect as a delicacy (Sygo, 2014). The Associated
Press discussed the statements of the UN that
promoted the use of insects as a healthy snack in an
online article (Associated press, 2013). The picture they
added in the article, Fig. 10,, was of a dish prepared with
insects as an ingredient. In 2009 the Dutch “Financieel
Dagblad” published a similar picture in an article
written by Van Huis on the forecast that the rising price
of meat will stimulate the use of insects in food (Van
Fig. 10 An insect dish by the Associated Press
Huis, 2009).

There are some news articles that discuss the introduction of insects as animal feed component. On
the 8th of December 2014, the Guardian posted an article stating insects can be used to “feed the
animals of tomorrow” (McEachran,
Eachran, 2014). In June and October 2014, the BBC posted two articles on
the potential of insects as animal feed (Anthes, 2014; Fleming, 2014). Only the Guardian posted a
picture of insect meal for animal feed in Fleming’s article.
It seems that the majority of articles on the introduction of insects to feed the world is related to
insects as human food rather than insects as animal feed components. All the articles, both on edible
insects and animal feed, include pictures of edible insects, while only one article on insects for animal
feed includes a picture of insect meal. Although stakeholders in the field expect that people will not
care whether insects are used as animal feed for the production for their own food, the majority of
articles depicts pictures of edible insects that are said to be perceived as unsanitary. Including
pictures of insect-based animal feed rather than edible insects might therefore put more focus on
the potential consumer acceptance of insects as feed.

Company communication on insect feed

Companies that are engaged in the insect meal industry often publish developments in the industry
on their websites and often refer to other stakeholders in the industry. These publications include
updates on conferences, scientific articles and pictures and videos of insects from themselves and
other stakeholders. Publications and references to stakeholders are often accompanied by images
and statements on the company’s products and processes. All these topics are reviewed separately in
the upcoming paragraphs.

Conferences
Several organizations, like producer associations in the insect meal industry, promote or provide
updates on upcoming and past conferences related to insects. Operating in the international market
of sustainable animal nutrition, EnviroFlight posted an article on their company website relating to
the conference held in Wageningen (EnviroFlight, LLC, 2014). On a national level this conference was
also promoted by the cooperative Venik and on an international level by the initiative PROteINSECT.
They posted the presentation and shared information on their websites (Venik.nl, 2014;
Proteinsect.eu, 2014).
Articles
A common feature that can be seen on many websites of players in the industry is the publication of
articles from external parties. In Europe, the larvae breeder MealFood Europe and the initiative
PROteINSECT provide the headings and website links of several newspaper and magazine articles on
the use of insects as animal feed. The PROteINSECT initiative provided many links to websites related
to the breeding and processing of insects as well. On a global level there are several companies that
post comparable articles. The Media department of EnviroFlight posted 7 articles on the use of
insects in animal feed so far this year, some of them on the role the company itself plays in the
development of an animal feed component. There are several companies that publish insights on the
developments in the insect industry on their website. For instance, the companies NutrInsecta and
Organic Value Recovery posted newspaper and scientific articles on several subpages of their
websites, which could give the impression or even imply they are closely involved in the latest news
and developments of the industry.

Recipes_and_social_media
The presence on social media can expand companies’ exposure in such a way that a greater public
can be reached. The leading South African fly farm AgriProtein and the American breeder Aspire
Food Group linked their websites to their corporate Facebook page. Aspire FG also posted a link to an
external blog and incorporated their corporate Twitter account into their homepage to present the
most current Tweets concerning the company. The links to several blogs and to the corporate
Facebook, Twitter and Instagram sites of the Canadian insect food and feed producing company Next
Millennium are accompanied by numerous recipes to give the consumer inspiration on how they can
cook with the use of edible insects.

Pictures_and_videos
Because it has been shown that people have the tendency to remember the things they have seen
first the best (the Primacy Effect), the homepages of corporate websites are reviewed in particular
because it is the first thing viewers see when they arrive at a corporation's website. The logos,
banners and text on the homepage will strongly contribute to the viewer’s understanding of the
corporate practices. The information that is provided on pages other than the homepage will
contribute to this initial impression and will be discussed in the following paragraph.

Entologics, EnviroFlight, Aspire FG and Co-Prot depict the animals they rear and process by including
one or several pictures of living caterpillars, crickets and flies as headers on their homepages. Other
companies as Next Millenium mainly post pictures of the use of insects in food. Almost at the end of
their homepage, Next Millenium included a small section to illustrate they produce insect meal for
pets and livestock in addition to the large amount of information on insect food. There the majority
of the pictures depict insects for human consumption, it is initially unclear they produce animal feed
as well. The waste processing company of Organic Value Recovery is, to a certain extent, ambiguous
on their operations as well. By only depicting a black soldier fly in their company logo and mainly
including pictures of waste processing, it is not clear they make use of insect breeding. In addition to
the extensive written information they currently provide, the inclusion of pictures of live insects or
the breeding or processing of insects could clarify that for their operations in the waste sector they
mainly use soldier flies to produce high protein insect meal. On their homepages, ESR International,
NutrInsecta and AgriProtein did place such clarifying pictures.
Videos can be used as well to depict the methods of processing, as AgriProtein posted ten Youtube
videos mainly made by themselves, on one of the tab pages of their website. The organizations Co-
Prot, PROteINSECT and EnviroFlight made use of a single video on their homepage. In their video
PROteINSECT additionally explains the developments made in the insect breeding industry clearly.

It seems that many companies make use of pictures of insects, or the ways in which these insects can
be processed and sometimes how they can be used in food. The majority of the companies do not
include pictures of insect meal or bags containing insect-based animal feed on their website, except
AgriProtein, Entologics and Organic Value Recovery. While this is the end product that the majority of
the companies produce, they do not clearly depict that on their websites due to the lack of strong
visual cues.

The clearest and most interactive homepages of companies operating in the industry are the ones of
EnviroFlight, NutrInsecta, Next Millenium and Ynsect. With the use of several pictures that
sequentially appear in the header of their homepages, both Enviroflight and NutrInsecta illustrate
the breeding process of insects at their facility, creating a clear picture of their operations. At the
homepages of Next Millenium and Ynsect, all the information that is provided on the entire website
is shown on a single page. The separate parts of this homepage can easily be found by the use of the
different tab buttons. Where Next Millenium shows many recipes, Tweets, blogs and other messages
all mixed throughout their homepage, Ynsect clearly states their operations one by one. These
operations include the breeding and processing methods, the types of animal feed they make and
the reasoning behind these operations. With the use of many images, pictures, statistics and
information on their mission and vision, Ynsect has the most appealing website on the breeding and
processing of insects for animal feed, depicted in Fig. 11 below. Company A can use websites like
these as source of inspiration. They can also consider including aspects such as pictures, recipes and
references to blogs, as is being done by companies that produce insect food.

Fig. 11 Several parts of the homepage of Ynsect

Company communication on insect food

A study of the industry showed that the number of companies selling insects as food are still limited
and most are in the start-up phase. These companies are mainly located in the United States, but
some are emerging in Europe, Australia and Africa. The actual communication concerning edible
insects as food is managed by the companies themselves and by consumer initiatives, such as blogs
and NGOs.

This part of the chapter elaborates on the research that has been done for the purpose of this
research in order to understand how these companies are currently communicating their end
product. Several companies located around the globe were investigated. Their end products are
listed in the table below, after which the communication techniques are assessed through a
comparison of channels used for communication to consumers, including websites and social
networks. Existing blogs discussing the topic of edible insects and restaurants serving insects in food
are discussed subsequently. Online media are more frequently used for corporate communication
because in the era of globalization, the exchange of information from peer to peer is considered the
most effective technique of viral marketing. The subsequent experience of eating insect products, for
example in restaurants, is considered one of the most important sources of promotion. It has been
shown that people react to a chef’s or expert’s suggestions, to what they experience and to what
they watch on TV or on the internet. Their reaction often consists of sharing photos or comments, via
social networks, with their network of friends.

A number of companies selling insect-based food products are listed below.

Table 54 List of companies with relative end products

Companies Products

United States

Six Foods “Chirps”: crickets snack

Exo Cricket flour bars

All Things Bugs Cricket powder

World Ento Cricket powder and recipe ready adult crickets

Chapul Energy bars cricket

Don bugito Chocolate crickets and worms, chili-lime crickets

worms salt

Bitty food Cookies made with cricket flour, flours

Hotliks Candies
World Entomophagy Organically raised mealworms and crickets

Next millennium farms Crickets

France

Insectes comestibles Insects sweets, dehydrated insects, snacks

Micronutris Biscuits, macaroons, chocolate, snacks

The Netherlands

Bugs original Mealworms, buffalo worms, locusts

Thailand

Thailand unique Canned bugs, bug candy, bulk insects, plain

insects, drinks and infusions, flour

Australia

Edible bug shop Candies, ant tea, roasted bugs, chili and garlic
crickets, roasted mealworms, plain roasted
crickets

Burkina Faso

FasoPro Caterpillars

Companies’ communication on websites and social networks

A valuable technique generally adopted by companies to promote products is to highlight scientific
information, usually by reformulating it to make it understandable for the general public. Advantages
of the use of insects are usually represented by a table and supported by images.

The geographical position of the company is not taken into account as a variable assuming that
companies from all over the world have the same goal of convincing citizens to introduce insects into
their diet. Creating awareness among people regarding the beneficial aspects of edible insects is a
first essential step. Up until now communication has been associated with the diffusion of positive
information to reduce the aforementioned “yuck factor” common among consumers. The
companies’ disposition in the market was not integrated into the work. Nevertheless, it should be
taken into account that cultural differences are likely to affect the impact communication channels
such as social media and communication strategies can have on citizens.

Techniques of content marketing are applied first. This marketing tool is used to create and distribute
valuable, relevant and consistent content to attract a specific audience with the objective of getting
customers to buy a product. Sensorial marketing is an appropriate communication tool that should
be implemented when selling insects to let the general public taste, touch and experience insects.

The websites that have been investigated included several aspects that are listed below.
Pictures
A common feature on websites and social networks are pictures used to promote the end product.
Pictures often portray cooked or prepared food as depicted in Fig. 8, or insects and people eating
insects. Such pictures of cooked food are important in order to give the consumer an idea of the
possible ways to use the raw insect; this is related to the use of recipes and is meant to reduce the
“Yuck factor” of eating insects. Pictures of live insects are shown to make people more comfortable
with the idea of eating them as an ordinary food component. On several websites pictures of
consumers eating and experiencing the new food are included, which can enhance consumers’
reliance on these companies that rear or process insects for food.

Recipes
Pictures of recipes and videos of chefs and consumers preparing insect food are frequently shared on
corporate websites and social networks to get the attention of readers. The attitude and curiosity of
consumers on discovering new foods is also increased by the circulation of TV programs, cook shows
and blogs. Recipes are often presented by famous chefs and used as a testimony to their quality and
the reliability of the product.

Specific words

Specific words are often used on corporate websites, aiming to guide consumers’ attention toward
specific aspects of the topic of edible insects. Examples are the use of words such as “protein”
instead of “insect”; the word “future” is also frequently used and associated with the sustainability of
the entire phenomenon of edible insects. The name of insects like crickets, are usually present in
websites to increase the familiarity of consumers with the product.

Comparison with livestock

Insects and conventional livestock are usually compared on the basis of nutritional values and
environmental impact in order to increase consumer awareness on the advantages of using insects.
By providing information concerning gas emission, land use, water consumption and rates of
conversion into useable protein, these websites emphasize the lessened impact of insect farms on
the environment compared to that of traditional farming.

Videos
The use of videos is common to support text. They are used to give voice to experts like scientists
from universities, research institutes or research departments from companies who explain why
people should introduce insects in their diet.

Specific techniques adopted by companies on websites and social networks

Communication is important to persuade people to use insects in their meals or as flour in the
preparation of meals. In order to convince consumers many companies adopt their own strategy,
aside from the common features listed above. Listed below are the most frequently used techniques,
distinguishing websites from social networks.

The majority of companies apply the same strategy on their website; showing the final product
packed or cooked on their homepage. Micronutris, Bugs Original and ThailandUnique contrarily
prefer to show crude insects on their homepage.
Promotion through social networks is similar to communication on websites: the content and the
general features remain the same. The difference is the target group of each social network, which
influences a difference in formulation and content.

Facebook is used to present and share recipes, news and videos on the entomology world, events
and conferences around the world, nutritional benefits of insects, news on entomophagy,
advertisement of the product, initiatives, interesting articles, jokes and pictures of food.

On Twitter the content remains the same, though it is presented in a way targeted to both
businesses and customers. For instance, Micronutris decided to show packed products on this
platform. As companies make use of hashtags to refer to their competitors, it seems that they are
collaborating to a certain extent to communicate on insect-based food.

Blogs
On the web, discussions on edible insects are ongoing on many blogs. Blogs are the virtual spaces
where consumers express their thoughts and opinions on all kinds of topics, including edible insects.
For the sake of a company's communication it is relevant to probe the opinion of future customers.
From an analysis on blogs it is possible to check what kind of information is currently circulating and
what is still missing. Company advertising influences the ongoing discussions on these blogs. The
main discussion concerns entomophagy, since the majority of western countries are still skeptical
towards the consumption of insects as food. Recipes and experiences are exchanged to persuade
people to make use of a more sustainable, healthy and affordable protein source.
Blogs are often part of NGOs that organize projects, fairs and conferences. NGOs are the points of
contact between businesses, consumers, scientists, chefs and everyone involved in promoting edible
insects.

These following blogs focus on the breeding and consumption of insects: Girls meet Bug, Insects Are
Food, Eat Yummy bugs, Small stock Food, Ital Bugs, EDIBL nation, Tiny Farms, Ento, Edible Bug Farm,
4Ento and Little Herds.

Restaurants
The involvement of professionals in the food sector can be used as a measure to persuade people to
include insects in their diet. Chefs are the professionals of this field and can make a big difference.
This way of persuading consumers with the use of restaurants and chefs is illustrated by the
introduction of sushi to Western culture. The guided introduction of an unknown element into a
culture’s diet makes it easier to implement. Many chefs of restaurants all over the world already
added insects to their menus. The restaurants Typhoon in Santa Monica, Laurent Quenioux at Good
Girl Dinette in Los Angeles, Archipelago in London, Noma in Copenhagen and Noma Claridge’s in
London (with René Redzepi considered the world’s number one chef), Don Bugito in San Francisco,
Aphrodite in Nice and Le Festin Nu in France are examples of such restaurants.

Other_businesses_around_insects
Aside from the medium of large scale insect breeders themselves, other businesses operating in the
insect breeding market are emerging. Such companies design applications for home-scale edible fly
larvae breeding such as Katharina Unger’s Farm 432 and Mansour Ourasanah’s grasshopper rearing
“Lepsis”.
Chapter 9: Conclusions
Insects have shown to hold great potential compared to conventional feed ingredients and feed
requirements. The rearing conditions required by insects are highly variable. In general, insects have
common health issues, but most of them can be resolved by creating hygienic working conditions.
This will be a challenge, as rearing on waste will definitely bring insects in contact with pathogens.
Chitin is still a major barrier as it is an allergenic and also hinders the processing of insect meal.
Insects can be reared on a broad spectrum of substrates, depending on the species. Black soldier flies
provide a good solution for a partial substitution of soybean meal. To fulfil the animal requirements,
it is advised to use a mixture of insect meal to optimize the amino acid profile.

In Europe, due to the absence of diagnostic methods to detect pig or poultry proteins in animal feed,
it is currently prohibited to introduce processed animal proteins (PAPs) into feed. The only exception
is represented by non-ruminant PAPs for aquaculture. In the future, the possibility to introduce
processed animal proteins to pig and poultry should be addressed. Further research with regards to
the different types of substrates on which insects can be grown is expected.

Regulations on the use of insects in animal feed in Africa and China do not prohibit the settlement of
new companies. In Africa the legislation is absent, while there is a clear law in China that allows the
introduction of PAPs in feed if they do not affect human and animal health.

Companies are distributed worldwide, but are mainly concentrated in the U.S.A. and Canada. The
main player in the industry is AgriProtein, which is settled in South Africa. Black soldier flies,
houseflies and mealworms are the most commonly reared insects both in and outside the Europe.

The final step in order to introduce insects as a food or feed ingredient is the acceptance of
consumers. Companies and research institutes are the most involved in the communication, in
particular on edible insects rather than on insects in animal feed. Among those companies, the ones
producing food as an end product are exploring new methods to persuade skeptical consumers.

Initial surveys already show a high acceptance of meat processed from insect fed animals by the
general public. In combination with the high potential insects have shown to hold, this creates good
perspectives for the future.
References
13903, I. 2005. Animal feeding stuff - Determination of amino acids content.
Aarts, K., Hubert, A., and Katz, H. 2014. Insects, Food Safety First - First time Right:
Regulatory roadmap for insect products in Feed and Food applications. Retrieved
from http://www.protix.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/IPIFF-Report-on-Regulatory-
Barriers-related-to-insect-production.pdf
Adler, A.I., and F.P. Brancato. 1995. Human furuncular myiasis caused by Hermetia illucens
(Diptera: Stratiomyidae). Journal of medical entomology. 32:745-746.
Agrahari, S., and N. Wadhwa. 2010. Degradation of chicken feather a poultry waste product
by keratinolytic bacteria isolated from dumping site at Ghazipur poultry processing
plant. Int J Poult Sci. 9:482-489.
Alamer, A.H. 2013. Endocrine control of fat body composition and effects of the insect growth
regulators methoprene and pyriproxyfen on the development and reproduction of the
Argentinian cockroach, Blaptica dubia Serville (Blattaria: Blaberidae).
Aniebo, A., and O. Owen. 2010. Effects of age and method of drying on the proximate
composition of housefly larvae (Musca domestica Linnaeus) meal (HFLM). Pakistan
Journal of Nutrition. 9:485-487.
Aniebo, A.O., E.S. Erondu, and O.J. Owen. 2009. Replacement of fish meal with maggot
meal in African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) diets Sustitución de harina de pescado
con harina de larvas en dietas para el bagre Africano (Clarias gariepinus). Revista
Científica UDO Agrícola. 9:666-671.
Anthony, W.B. 1971. Animal waste value—nutrient recovery and utilization. Journal of animal
science. 32:799-802.
Aperis, G., B. Burgwyn Fuchs, C.A. Anderson, J.E. Warner, S.B. Calderwood, and E.
Mylonakis. 2007. < i> Galleria mellonella</i> as a model host to study infection by
the< i> Francisella tularensis</i> live vaccine strain. Microbes and infection. 9:729-
734.
Arancon, N.Q., C.A. Edwards, A. Babenko, J. Cannon, P. Galvis, and J.D. Metzger. 2008.
Influences of vermicomposts, produced by earthworms and microorganisms from
cattle manure, food waste and paper waste, on the germination, growth and flowering
of petunias in the greenhouse. Applied soil ecology. 39:91-99.
Arends, J., and R. Wright. 1981. Mass rearing of face flies. Journal of economic entomology.
74:355-358.
Ashfaq, M., N. Kadhum Al-Temeni, and S. Ahmed. 2005. Effects of artificial diets on some
parameters of greater wax moth, Galleria mellonella L. under optimum conditions.
Journal of Agricultural Research. 43:223-228.
Baker, D. 1997. Ideal amino acid profiles for swine and poultry and their applications in feed
formulation. Biokyowa Technical Review. 9.
Banjo, A., O. Lawal, and O. Adeduji. 2005. Bacteria and fungi isolated from housefly (Musca
domestica L.) larvae. African Journal of Biotechnology. 4:780-784.
Bänziger, H., and T. Pape. 2004. Flowers, faeces and cadavers: natural feeding and laying
habits of flesh flies in Thailand (Diptera: Sarcophagidae, Sarcophaga spp.). Journal of
Natural History. 38:1677-1694.
Barin, A., F. Arabkhazaeli, S. Rahbari, and S. Madani. 2010. The housefly, Musca
domestica, as a possible mechanical vector of Newcastle disease virus in the
laboratory and field. Medical and veterinary entomology. 24:88-90.
Barker, D., M.P. Fitzpatrick, and E.S. Dierenfeld. 1998. Nutrient composition of selected
whole invertebrates. Zoo Biology. 17:123-134.
Barry, T. 2004. Evaluation of the economic, social, and biological feasibility of bioconverting
food wastes with the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens).
Basset, A., R.S. Khush, A. Braun, L. Gardan, F. Boccard, J.A. Hoffmann, and B. Lemaitre.
2000. The phytopathogenic bacteria Erwinia carotovora infects Drosophila and
 activates an immune response. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
97:3376-3381.
Baumholtz, M.A., L.C. Parish, J.A. Witkowski, and W.B. Nutting. 1997. The medical
importance of cockroaches. International Journal of Dermatology. 36:90-96.
BAY, E., C. PITIS, and G. WARD. 1969. Influence of Moisture Content of Bovine Feces on
Oviposition and Development of the Face Fly1. Journal of Economic Entomology.
62:41-44.
BEARD, R.L., and D.C. SANDS. 1973. Factors affecting degradation of poultry manure by
flies. Environmental Entomology. 2:801-806.
Beckel, A., P. Belter, and A. Smith. 1948. The nondistillation alcohol extraction process for
soybean oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society. 25:10-11.
Bell, J. 1984. Nutrients and toxicants in rapeseed meal: a review. Journal of Animal Science.
58:996-1010.
Belluco, S., C. Losasso, M. Maggioletti, C.C. Alonzi, M.G. Paoletti, and A. Ricci. 2013. Edible
insects in a food safety and nutritional perspective: a critical review. Comprehensive
reviews in food science and food safety. 12:296-313.
Bernstein, D.I., J.S. Gallagher, and I. Leonard Bernstein. 1983. Mealworm asthma: clinical
and immunologic studies. Journal of allergy and clinical immunology. 72:475-480.
Bodenheimer, F.S. 1951. Insects as human food. Springer.
Bodnaryk, R., and P. Morrison. 1966. The relationship between nutrition, haemolymph
proteins, and ovarian development in< i> Musca domestica</i> L. Journal of Insect
Physiology. 12:963-976.
Bondari, K., and D. Sheppard. 1981. Soldier fly larvae as feed in commercial fish production.
Aquaculture. 24:103-109.
Bondari, K., and D. Sheppard. 1987. Soldier fly, Hermetia illucens L., larvae as feed for
channel catfish, Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque), and blue tilapia, Oreochromis
aureus (Steindachner). Aquaculture Research. 18:209-220.
Bosch, G., S. Zhang, D.G. Oonincx, and W.H. Hendriks. 2014. Protein quality of insects as
potential ingredients for dog and cat foods. Journal of Nutritional Science. 3:e29.
Bradley, S.W., and D. Sheppard. 1984. House fly oviposition inhibition by larvae ofHermetia
illucens, the black soldier fly. Journal of chemical ecology. 10:853-859.
Braithwaite, V. A. 2010. Do Fish Feel Pain? Oxford University Press, Oxford, United
Kingdom.
Brown, P.B., S.J. Kaushik, and H. Peres. 2008. Protein feedstuffs originating from soybeans.
Alternative Protein Sources in Aquaculture Diets:205-223.
Buatois, A., and J.-P. Croze. 1991. Effect of variability of breeding temperature on the
thermal responses of a poikilothermic insect, the female cockroach Blaberus craniifer.
Journal of Thermal Biology. 16:31-36.
Bugguide. 2013. Bugguide. Vol. 2014. http://bugguide.net/node/view/896037.
Butler, E., and G. Fenwick. 1984. Trimethylamine and fishy taint in eggs. World's Poultry
Science Journal. 40:38-51.
Butt, K.R., J. Frederickson, and R.M. Morris. 1992. The intensive production of< i> lumbricus
terrestris</i> L. for soil amelioration. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 24:1321-1325.
Cao, J., J. Yan, Y. Huang, G. Wang, R. Zhang, X. Chen, Y. Wen, and T. Zhou. 2012. Effects
of replacement of fish meal with housefly maggot meal on growth performance,
antioxidant and non-specific immune indexes of juvenile Litopenaeus vannamei. J.
Fish. Sci. China. 36:529-537.
Capinera, J.L. 1987. Integrated pest management on rangeland: a shortgrass prairie
perspective. Westview Pr.
Capinera, J.L. 2008. House Fly, Musca domestica L.(Diptera: Muscidae). In Encyclopedia of
Entomology. Springer. 1877-1880.
Carrel, J., and E. Tanner. 2002. Sex-Specific Food Preferences in the Madagascar Hissing
Cockroach Gromphadorhina portentosa (Dictyoptera: Blaberidae). Journal of Insect
Behavior. 15:707-714.
Chaudhury, M., and H.J. Ball. 1973. The effect of age, nutritional factors, and gonadal
development on the mating behaviour of the face fly,< i> Musca autumnalis</i>.
Journal of insect physiology. 19:57-64.
Cheville, N., D. Rogers, W. Deyoe, E. Krafsur, and J. Cheville. 1989. Uptake and excretion of
Brucella abortus in tissues of the face fly (Musca autumnalis). American journal of
veterinary research. 50:1302-1306.
ChinaPapers. 2010. Study on biological characteristics of Zophobas morio and its function on
plastic degradation. Vol. 2014. http://mt.china-papers.com/1/?p=116609.
Chor, W.-K., L.-S. Lim, and R. Shapawi. 2013. Evaluation of Feather Meal as a Dietary
Protein Source for African Catfish Fry, Clarias gariepinus. Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Science. 8:697-705.
Cicková, H., M. Kozánek, I. Morávek, and P. Takác. 2012. A behavioral method for
separation of house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) larvae from processed pig manure.
Journal of economic entomology. 105:62-66.
Čičková, H., M. Kozánek, and P. Takáč. 2013. Improvement of survival of the house fly
(Musca domestica L.) larvae under mass-rearing conditions. Bulletin of entomological
research. 103:119-125.
Čičková, H., G.L. Newton, R.C. Lacy, and M. Kozánek. 2014. The use of fly larvae for
organic waste treatment. Waste Management.
Čičková, H., B. Pastor, M. Kozánek, A. Martínez-Sánchez, S. Rojo, and P. Takáč. 2012.
Biodegradation of pig manure by the housefly, Musca domestica: a viable ecological
strategy for pig manure management. PloS one. 7:e32798.
Clark, K., L. Evans, and R. Wall. 2006. Growth rates of the blowfly,< i> Lucilia sericata</i>,
on different body tissues. Forensic science international. 156:145-149.
CLIFFORD, C.W., R.M. ROE, and J. Woodring. 1977. Rearing methods for obtaining house
crickets, Acheta domesticus, of known age, sex, and instar. Annals of the
Entomological Society of America. 70:69-74.
Cohen, D., M. Green, C. Block, R. Slepon, R. Ambar, S.S. Wasserman, and M.M. Levine.
1991. Reduction of transmission of shigellosis by control of houseflies (Musca
domestica). The Lancet. 337:993-997.
Coon, C., and B. Zhang. 1999. Ideal amino acid profile for layers examined. Feedstuffs
(USA).
Cowey, C. 1994. Amino acid requirements of fish: a critical appraisal of present values.
Aquaculture. 124:1-11.
Craig Sheppard, D., G. Larry Newton, S.A. Thompson, and S. Savage. 1994. A value added
manure management system using the black soldier fly. Bioresource technology.
50:275-279.
DANIELS, S., K. Simkiss, and R. Smith. 1991. A simple larval diet for population studies on
the blowfly Lucilia sericata (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Medical and Veterinary
Entomology. 5:283-292.
Das, M., A. Ganguly, and P. Haldar. 2009. Space Requirement for Mass Rearing of Two
Common Indian Acridid Adults (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in Laboratory Condition.
American-Eurasian J Agric & Environ Sci. 6:313-316.
Davis, N., N. Prescott, C. Savory, and C. Wathes. 1999. Preferences of growing fowls for
different light intensities in relation to age, strain and behaviour. Animal welfare.
8:193-203.
De Blas, C., and G. Mateos. 2010. 12 Feed Formulation. Nutrition of the rabbit:222.
DeFoliart, G., M. Finke, and M. Sunde. 1982. Potential value of the Mormon cricket
(Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae) harvested as a high-protein feed for poultry. Journal of
Economic Entomology. 75:848-852.
De Graaf, M. 2014. ICCO - Insects to feed the world. Icco-international.com. Retrieved 2
December 2014, from http://www.icco-international.com/int/news/blogs/marijke-de-
graaf/insects-to-feed-the-world/
Design, B. 2008. Black soldier fly: compiled research on best cultivation practices. Vol. 2014.
http://biosystemsblog.com/2008/2007/2009/black-soldier-fly-compiled-research-on-
best-cultivation-practices/.
DESPINS, J.L., and R.C. AXTELL. 1995. Feeding behavior and growth of broiler chicks fed
larvae of the darkling beetle, Alphitobius diaperinus. Poultry science. 74:331-336.
Devi, S.J., and C.J. Murray. 1991. Cockroaches (Blatta and Periplaneta species) as
reservoirs of drug-resistant salmonellas. Epidemiology and Infection. 107:357-361.
Dhillon, M., S. Kumar, and G. Gujar. 2014. A common HPLC-PDA method for amino acid
analysis in insects and plants.
Diener, S., F. Gutiérrez, C. Zurbrugg, and K. Tockner. 2009. Are larvae of the Black soldier
fly-Hermetia illuscens-A financially viable option for organic waste management in
Costa rica. Cagliari, CISA.
Diener, S., C. Zurbrügg, F.R. Gutiérrez, D.H. Nguyen, A. Morel, T. Koottatep, and K.
Tockner. 2011. Black soldier fly larvae for organic waste treatment—prospects and
constraints. In Proceedings of the WasteSafe—2nd International Conference on Solid
Waste Management in the Developing Countries. Khulna, Bangladesh.
Domínguez, J., M. Aira, and M. Gómez-Brandón. 2010. Vermicomposting: earthworms
enhance the work of microbes. In Microbes at work. Springer. 93-114.
Dozier, W., M. Kidd, and A. Corzo. 2008. Dietary amino acid responses of broiler chickens.
The Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 17:157-167.
DubiaRoachDepot. 2014. http://dubiaroachdepot.com/guidance/roach-growth-population-
density.
Ekpo, K. Nutrient composition, functional properties and anti-nutrient content of
Rhynchophorus Pheonicis (F) Larva.
Ekrakene, T., and C. Igeleke. 2007. Microbial Isolates from the roasted larva of the palm
weevil (Rhynchophorus phoenicis [F]) from edo and delta states of Nigeria. Australian
Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences. 1:763-768.
El Boushy, A. 1991. House-fly pupae as poultry manure converters for animal feed: A review.
Bioresource technology. 38:45-49.
Elwood, R. W. 2011. Pain and suffering in invertebrates?. ILAR Journal, 52(2), 175-184.
Erickson, M.C., M. Islam, C. Sheppard, J. Liao, and M.P. Doyle. 2004. Reduction of
Escherichia coli O157: H7 and Salmonella enterica serovar enteritidis in chicken
manure by larvae of the black soldier fly. Journal of Food Protection®. 67:685-690.
Evans, R.J., and H.A. Butts. 1948. Studies on the heat inactivation of lysine in soy bean oil
meal. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 175:15-20.
Fatchurochim, S., C. Geden, and R. Axtell. 1989. Filth fly(Diptera) oviposition and larval
development in poultry manure of various moisture levels. Journal of Entomological
Science. 24:224-231.
Finke, M., M. Sunde, and G. DeFoliart. 1985. An evaluation of the protein quality of Mormon
crickets (Anabrus simplex Haldeman) when used as a high protein feedstuff for
poultry. Poultry Science. 64:708-712.
Finke, M.D. 2002. Complete nutrient composition of commercially raised invertebrates used
as food for insectivores. Zoo Biology. 21:269-285.
Finke, M.D. 2013. Complete nutrient content of four species of feeder insects. Zoo biology.
32:27-36.
Fischer, O., L. Matlova, L. Dvorska, P. Svastova, J. Bartl, R. Weston, and I. Pavlik. 2004.
Blowflies Calliphora vicina and Lucilia sericata as passive vectors of Mycobacterium
avium subsp. avium, M. a. paratuberculosis and M. a. hominissuis. Medical and
veterinary entomology. 18:116-122.
Förster, M., S. Klimpel, and K. Sievert. 2009. The house fly (< i> Musca domestica</i>) as a
potential vector of metazoan parasites caught in a pig-pen in Germany. Veterinary
parasitology. 160:163-167.
Fotedar, R. 2001. Vector potential of houseflies (< i> Musca domestica</i>) in the
transmission of< i> Vibrio cholerae</i> in India. Acta tropica. 78:31-34.
Frederickson, J., G. Howell, and A.M. Hobson. 2007. Effect of pre-composting and
vermicomposting on compost characteristics. European Journal of Soil Biology.
43:S320-S326.
Freymann, B.P., R. Buitenwerf, O. Desouza, and H. Olff. 2008. The importance of termites
(Isoptera) for the recycling of herbivore dung in tropical ecosystems: a review.
European Journal of Entomology. 105:165.
Gerhardt, R., J. Allen, W. Greene, and P. Smith. 1982. The role of face flies in an episode of
infectious bovine keratoconjunctivitis. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical
Association. 180:156-159.
Giri, A., B. Johnson, and E. Thompson. 2014. NEBRASKA’S ANIMAL AGRICULTURE:
ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF CATTLE, HOG, DAIRY AND POULTRY INDUSTRY
CHANGES. Mid-Continent Regional Science Association:36.
Gómez-Brandón, M., M. Aira, M. Lores, and J. Domínguez. 2011. Changes in microbial
community structure and function during vermicomposting of pig slurry. Bioresource
technology. 102:4171-4178.
Goodwin, M.A., and W.D. Waltman. 1996. Transmission of Eimeria, viruses, and bacteria to
chicks: darkling beetles (Alphitobius diaperinus) as vectors of pathogens. The Journal
of Applied Poultry Research. 5:51-55.
Gov.uk. 2014. Using animal by-products to feed carnivores - Detailed guidance - GOV.UK.
Retrieved 28 November 2014, from https://www.gov.uk/using-animal-by-products-to-
feed-carnivores-at-kennels-and-zoos
Graczyk, T.K., M.R. Cranfield, R. Fayer, and H. Bixler. 1999. House flies (Musca domestica)
as transport hosts of Cryptosporidium parvum. The American journal of tropical
medicine and hygiene. 61:500-504.
Grove, D.G. 1959. The Natural History of the Angular-winged Katydid, Microcentrum
Rhombifolium (Sauss.). Cornell Univ.
Hakman, A., Peters, M., and van Huis, A. (2014). Toelatingsprocedure voor insecten als
mini-vee. Voor het plaatsen van nieuwe insectensoorten op de lijst voor productie te
houden dieren (p. 37). Wageningen : Laboratory of Entomology WUR.
Halver, J.E., and R.W. Hardy. 2002. Fish nutrition. Academic Press.
Hamilton, G. 2014. Edible insects fly into spotlight: International conference to promote bugs
as a sustainable, healthy delicacy. National Post. Received 28 November 2014, from
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/08/08/edible-insects-fly-into-spotlight-international-
conference-to-promote-bugs-as-a-sustainable-healthy-delicacy/
Han, M.-S., and H. Watanabe. 1988. Transovarial transmission of two microsporidia in the
silkworm,< i> Bombyx mori</i>, and disease occurrence in the progeny population.
Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 51:41-45.
HAYDAKM, M.H. 1936. Is wax a necessary constituent of the diet of wax moth larvae?
Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 29:581-588.
Hazeleger, W.C., N.M. Bolder, R.R. Beumer, and W.F. Jacobs-Reitsma. 2008. Darkling
beetles (Alphitobius diaperinus) and their larvae as potential vectors for the transfer of
Campylobacter jejuni and Salmonella enterica serovar Paratyphi B variant Java
between successive broiler flocks. Applied and environmental microbiology. 74:6887-
6891.
Herpcenter. 2014. Breeding superworms. Vol. 2014. http://www.herpcenter.com/breeding-
feeder-insects/breeding-superworms.html.
HOGSETTE, J.A. 1992. New diets for production of house flies and stable flies (Diptera:
Muscidae) in the laboratory. Journal of economic entomology. 85:2291-2294.
Holmes, L., S. Vanlaerhoven, and J. Tomberlin. 2013. Substrate effects on pupation and
adult emergence of Hermetia illucens (Diptera: Stratiomyidae). Environmental
entomology. 42:370-374.
Hoste, B., L. Luyten, I. Claeys, E. Clynen, M.M. Rahman, A. Loof, and M. Breuer. 2002. An
improved breeding method for solitarious locusts. Entomologia experimentalis et
applicata. 104:281-288.
Huadong, L., L. Bingyang, T. Juan, W. Caixian, L. Hongli, Y. Yinxiu, and Z. Lie. 2012. The
Separation and Identification and Drug Resistance Analysis of the Pseudomonas
Aeruginosa of Zophobas Morio. China Animal Health. 10:012.
Huber, K., L. Gouilloud, and L. Zenner. 2007. A preliminary study of natural and experimental
infection of the lesser mealworm Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae)
with Histomonas meleagridis (Protozoa: Sarcomastigophora). Avian Pathology.
36:279-282.
ITO, T. 1960. A preliminary note on the nutritive value of soybean oil for the silk worm. In
Bombyx mori. Proc. Japan Acad. Vol. 36. 287-290.
Ito, T. 1967. Nutritional Requirements of the Silkworm, Bombyx mori L. Proceedings of the
Japan Academy. 43:57-61.
Jabir, M.A.R., S.A.R. Jabir, and S. Vikineswary. 2014. Nutritive potential and utilization of
super worm (Zophobas morio) meal in the diet of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)
juvenile. African Journal of Biotechnology. 11:6592-6598.
Jobin, L., and L. Huor. 1966. Aperçu du développement embryonnaire et postembryonnaire
du grillon domestique, Acheta domesticus (L.). Naturaliste Can. 93:701-718.
Kaakeh, W. 2005. Longevity, fecundity, and fertility of the red palm weevil, Rynchophorus
ferrugineus Olivier (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) on natural and artificial diets. Emirates
Journal of Food and Agriculture. 17.
Kaakeh, W., A.A. Khamis, and M.M. Abou-Nour. 2001. LIFE PARAMETERS OF THE RED
PALM WEEVIL, RHYNCHOPHORUS FERRUGINEUS OLIV., ON SUGARCANE
AND AN ARTIFICIAL DIET. In Proceedings of the Second Inter. Conference on Date
Palm (refereed), Al-Ain, UAE. 310-324.
Khan, H.A.A., S.A. Shad, and W. Akram. 2012. Effect of livestock manures on the fitness of
house fly, Musca domestica L.(Diptera: Muscidae). Parasitology research. 111:1165-
1171.
Khempaka, S., C. Chitsatchapong, and W. Molee. 2011. Effect of chitin and protein
constituents in shrimp head meal on growth performance, nutrient digestibility,
intestinal microbial populations, volatile fatty acids, and ammonia production in
broilers. The Journal of Applied Poultry Research. 20:1-11.
Khurad, A., A. Mahulikar, M. Rathod, M. Rai, S. Kanginakudru, and J. Nagaraju. 2004.
Vertical transmission of nucleopolyhedrovirus in the silkworm,< i> Bombyx mori</i> L.
Journal of invertebrate pathology. 87:8-15.
Kim, T., and M.K. Rust. 2013. Life History and Biology of the Invasive Turkestan Cockroach
(Dictyoptera: Blattidae). Journal of economic entomology. 106:2428-2432.
Klok, C. 2007. Effects of earthworm density on growth, development, and reproduction in< i>
Lumbricus rubellus</i>(Hoffm.) and possible consequences for the intrinsic rate of
population increase. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 39:2401-2407.
Klunder, H., J. Wolkers-Rooijackers, J. Korpela, and M. Nout. 2012. Microbiological aspects
of processing and storage of edible insects. Food Control. 26:628-631.
Koeleman, E. 2014. Insects crawling their way into feed regulation. ALLABOUTFEED: V 22.,
N. 6. Retrieved from
http://www.allaboutfeed.net/PageFiles/23744/001_1407765613712.pdf
Kong, C., H. Kang, B. Kim, and K. Kim. 2014. Ileal Digestibility of Amino Acids in Meat Meal
and Soybean Meal Fed to Growing Pigs. Asian-Australasian journal of animal
sciences. 27:990.
Krieg, N.R., S.E. Wedberg, and L.R. Penner. 1959. The cockroaches Blaberus craniifer and
Blaberus discoidalis as vectors of Salmonella typhosa. The American journal of
tropical medicine and hygiene. 8:119-123.
Kroeckel, S., A.-G. Harjes, I. Roth, H. Katz, S. Wuertz, A. Susenbeth, and C. Schulz. 2012.
When a turbot catches a fly: Evaluation of a pre-pupae meal of the Black Soldier Fly
(< i> Hermetia illucens</i>) as fish meal substitute—Growth performance and chitin
degradation in juvenile turbot (< i> Psetta maxima</i>). Aquaculture. 364:345-352.
Lalander, C., S. Diener, M.E. Magri, C. Zurbrügg, A. Lindström, and B. Vinnerås. 2013.
Faecal sludge management with the larvae of the black soldier fly (< i> Hermetia
 illucens</i>)—From a hygiene aspect. Science of the Total Environment. 458:312-
318.
Lamb, M.J., R.I. Samuels, and M.S. Simmonds. 1983. Influence of age and diet on DNA
synthesis and the DNA content of mid-gut cells in the dipteran< i> Sarcophaga
carnaria</i>. Mechanisms of ageing and development. 23:37-52.
Lawson, J., and M. Gemmell. 1990. Transmission of taeniid tapeworm eggs via blowflies to
intermediate hosts. Parasitology. 100:143-146.
Lazcano, C., M. Gómez-Brandón, and J. Domínguez. 2008. Comparison of the effectiveness
of composting and vermicomposting for the biological stabilization of cattle manure.
Chemosphere. 72:1013-1019.
LEE, R.E., and D.L. DENLINGER. 1985. Cold tolerance in diapausing and non‐diapausing
stages of the flesh fly, Sarcophaga crassipalpis. Physiological Entomology. 10:309-
315.
Lee, S.J., S.H. Kim, Y.S. Nai, Y.H. Je, B.L. Parker, and J.S. Kim. 2014. Management of
entomopathogenic fungi in cultures of Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae).
Entomological Research.
Leeson, S., and J.D. Summers. 2009. Commercial poultry nutrition. Nottingham University
Press.
Legislation:
Council Directive 2002/32/EC of 7 May 2002 on undesirable substances in animal feed
[2002] OJ L140/10
Regulation (EU) 55/2013 of 17 December 2012 concerning the extension of the scope of
Regulation (EU) 1214/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
professional cross-border transport of euro cash by road between euro area Member
States [2013] OJ L21/1
Regulation (EC) 68/2013 of 16 January 2013 on the Catalogue of feed materials [2013] OJ
L29/1
Regulation (EC) 183/2005 of 12 January 2005 laying down requirements for feed hygiene
[2005] OJ L35/1
Regulation (EC) 767/2009 of 13 July 2009 on the placing on the market and use of feed
[2009] OJ L229/1
Regulation (EC) 999/2001 of 22 May 2001 laying down rules for the prevention, control and
eradication of certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies [2001] OJ L147/1
Regulation (EC) 1069/2009 of 21 October 2009 laying down health rules as regards animal
by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing
Regulation (EC) 1774/2002 (Animal by-products Regulation) [2009] OJ L300/1
Regulation (EC) 1099/2009 of 24 September 2009 on the protection of animals at the time of
killing [2009] OJ L303/1
Lenz, M., C.-Y. Lee, M.J. Lacey, T. Yoshimura, and K. Tsunoda. 2011. The potential and
limits of termites (Isoptera) as decomposers of waste paper products. Journal of
economic entomology. 104:232-242.
Li, L., Z. Xu, J. Wu, and G. Tian. 2010. Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in the earthworm<
i> Eisenia fetida</i> in relation to bioavailable metal concentrations in pig manure.
Bioresource technology. 101:3430-3436.
Liu, C.-m., and Z.-m. Lian. 2003. Influence of Acrida cinerea Replacing Peru Fish Meal on
Growth Performance of Broiler Chickens. Journal of Economic Animal. 7:48-51.
Liu, Q., J.K. Tomberlin, J.A. Brady, M.R. Sanford, and Z. Yu. 2008. Black soldier fly (Diptera:
Stratiomyidae) larvae reduce Escherichia coli in dairy manure. Environmental
entomology. 37:1525-1530.
Lobley, G., V. Milne, J.M. Lovie, P. Reeds, and K. Pennie. 1980. Whole body and tissue
protein synthesis in cattle. British Journal of Nutrition. 43:491-502.
Lowe, C.N., and K.R. Butt. 2005. Culture techniques for soil dwelling earthworms: a review.
Pedobiologia. 49:401-413.
LUDWIG, D. 1956. Effects of temperature and parental age on the life cycle of the
mealworm, Tenebrio molitor Linnaeus (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). Annals of the
Entomological Society of America. 49:12-14.
Mackerras, M.J. 1933. Observations on the life-histories, nutritional requirements and
fecundity of blowflies. Bulletin of Entomological Research. 24:353-362.
MacVean, C.M., and J.L. Capinera. 1991. Pathogenicity and transmission potential of< i>
Nosema locustae</i> and< i> Vairimorpha</i> n. sp.(Protozoa: Microsporida) in
Mormon crickets (< i> Anabrus simplex</i>; Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae): A laboratory
evaluation. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology. 57:23-36.
Makkar, H.P.S., G. Tran, V. Heuzé, and P. Ankers. 2014. State-of-the-art on use of insects
as animal feed. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 197:1-33.
Manceron, S., T. Ben-Ari, and P. Dumas. 2014. Feeding proteins to livestock: Global land
use and food vs. feed competition. OCL. 21:D408.
Martin, R., J. Rivers, and U. Cowgill. 1976. Culturing mealworms as food for animals in
captivity. International Zoo Yearbook. 16:63-70.
Matthews, K.A. 1995. Care and feeding of Drosophila melanogaster. Drosophila
melanogaster: Practical Uses in Cell and Molecular Biology: Drosophila
Melanogaster: Practical Uses in Cell and Molecular BiologyVolume 44. 44:13.
McAllister, J., C. Steelman, L. Newberry, and J. Skeeles. 1995. Isolation of infectious bursal
disease virus from the lesser mealworm, Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer). Poultry
Science. 74:45-49.
McAllister, J., C. Steelman, J. Skeeles, L.A. Newberry, and E. Gbur. 1996. Reservoir
competence of Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for Escherichia
coli (Eubacteriales: Enterobacteriaceae). Journal of medical entomology. 33:983-987.
McDonald, P. 2002. Animal nutrition. Pearson education.
McFarlane, J. 1962. A comparison of the growth of the house cricket (Orthoptera: Gryllidae)
reared singly and in groups. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 40:559-560.
McFarlane, J., B. Neilson, and A. Ghouri. 1959. Artificial diets for the house cricket, Acheta
domesticus (L.). Canadian Journal of Zoology. 37:913-916.
MendipSilks. 2014. Mendip Silks; Life cycle of a silk worm. . Vol. 2014.
http://www.mendipsilks.com.au/a/More-About-Silk/Life-Cycle-of-the-Silk-Worm.
Mian, J., S. Hussain, P. Siddiqui, and A. Immink. 2014. Haematological, Biochemical and
Immunological Changes on Growth Enhancement of Grey Mullet Fingerlings (Mugil
cephalus L.) On Shrimp Head Protein Hydrolysate and Macroalgae Based Diets.
World Journal of Fish and Marine Sciences. 6:295-304.
Miller, B., J. Teotia, and T. Thatcher. 1974. Digestion of poultry manure by Musca domestica
1.
Monroy, F., M. Aira, and J. Domínguez. 2009. Reduction of total coliform numbers during
vermicomposting is caused by short-term direct effects of earthworms on
microorganisms and depends on the dose of application of pig slurry. Science of the
total environment. 407:5411-5416.
Moreki, B.T.J.C. 2012. Termites and Earthworms as Potential Alt ernative Sources of Protein
for Poultry. International Journal for Agro Veterinary and Medical Sciences. 6:368-
376.
Morgan, N., and H. Eby. 1975. Fly protein production from mechanically mixed animal
wastes. Israel journal of entomology.
Myers, H.M., J.K. Tomberlin, B.D. Lambert, and D. Kattes. 2008. Development of black
soldier fly (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) larvae fed dairy manure. Environmental
Entomology. 37:11-15.
Nakagaki, B., M. Sunde, and G. DeFoliart. 1987. Protein quality of the house cricket, Acheta
domesticus, when fed to broiler chicks. Poultry Science. 66:1367-1371.
Nannoni, F., G. Protano, and F. Riccobono. 2011. Uptake and bioaccumulation of heavy
elements by two earthworm species from a smelter contaminated area in northern
Kosovo. Soil Biology and Biochemistry. 43:2359-2367.
Neoh, K.-B., and C.-Y. Lee. 2011. The parasitoid, Verticia fasciventris causes morphological
and behavioral changes in infected soldiers of the fungus-growing termite,
Macrotermes carbonarius. Journal of Insect Science. 11.
Newton, L., C. Sheppard, D. Watson, G. Burtle, and R. Dove. 2005. Using the black soldier
fly, Hermetia illucens, as a value-added tool for the management of swine manure.
Animal and Poultry Waste Management Center, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC. 17.
Ng, W.K., F.L. Liew, L.P. Ang, and K.W. Wong. 2001. Potential of mealworm (Tenebrio
molitor) as an alternative protein source in practical diets for African catfish, Clarias
gariepinus. Aquaculture Research. 32:273-280.
NICKLE, D.A. 1976. Interspecific differences in frequency and other physical parameters of
pair-forming sounds of bush katydids (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae: Phaneropterinae).
Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 69:1136-1144.
Nobre, T., and D.K. Aanen. 2012. Fungiculture or termite husbandry? The ruminant
hypothesis. Insects. 3:307-323.
NRC. 1994. Nutrient requirements of poultry. National Research Council. National Academy
Press Washington^ eUSA USA.
Nuutinen, V., and K.R. Butt. 1997. The mating behaviour of the earthworm Lumbricus
terrestris (Oligochaeta: Lumbricidae). Journal of Zoology. 242:783-798.
Ober, C., and G.L. Chupp. 2009. The chitinase and chitinase-like proteins: a review of
genetic and functional studies in asthma and immune-mediated diseases. Current
opinion in allergy and clinical immunology. 9:401-408.
Ogunji, J., R. Toor, C. Schulz, and W. Kloas. 2008. Growth performance, nutrient utilization
of Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus fed housefly maggot meal (Magmeal) diets.
Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 8:141-147.
Olsen, A.R., and T.S. Hammack. 2000. Isolation of Salmonella spp. from the housefly,
Musca domestica L., and the dump fly, Hydrotaea aenescens (Wiedemann)(Diptera:
Muscidae), at caged-layer houses. Journal of Food Protection®. 63:958-960.
Oonincx, D., and E. Dierenfeld. 2012. An investigation into the chemical composition of
alternative invertebrate prey. Zoo biology. 31:40-54.
Oonincx, D., and A. van der Poel. 2011. Effects of diet on the chemical composition of
migratory locusts (Locusta migratoria). Zoo biology. 30:9-16.
Oonincx, D.G., J. van Itterbeeck, M.J. Heetkamp, H. van den Brand, J.J. van Loon, and A.
van Huis. 2010. An exploration on greenhouse gas and ammonia production by
insect species suitable for animal or human consumption. PloS one. 5:e14445.
Otranto, D., and D. Traversa. 2005. < i> Thelazia</i> eyeworm: an original endo-and ecto-
parasitic nematode. Trends in parasitology. 21:1-4.
Paul, D., G. Subba Rao, and D. Deb. 1992. Impact of dietary moisture on nutritional indices
and growth of< i> Bombyx mori</i> and concommitant larval duration. Journal of
insect physiology. 38:229-235.
Paun, C. 2014. EU-backed project seeks use of insects in animal feed. Retrieved 2
December 2014, from http://www.globalmeatnews.com/Industry-Markets/EU-backed-
project-seeks-use-of-insects-in-animal-feed
Pets, E. 2014. http://www.exotic-pets.co.uk/deaths-head-cockroach.html.
Popa, R., and T.R. Green. 2012. Using black soldier fly larvae for processing organic
leachates. Journal of economic entomology. 105:374-378.
PROteINSECT. 2014. Retrieved 2 December 2014, from
http://www.proteinsect.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/ghent/ede-presentations2.zip
Purrini, K., G.-W. Kohring, and Z. Seguni. 1988. Studies on a new disease in a natural
population of migratory locusts,< i> Locusta migratoria</i>, caused by an
entomopoxvirus. Journal of invertebrate pathology. 51:284-286.
Raad voor Diederenaangelegenheden,. 2010. Moral issues and public policy on animals: An
Opinion of the Council on Animal Affairs,. Retrieved from
http://www.rda.nl/home/files/caanl_moral_issues_and_public_policy_on_animals.pdf
RAMOS‐ELORDUY, J. 2009. Anthropo‐entomophagy: Cultures, evolution and sustainability.
Entomological Research. 39:271-288.
REALPE, F., A. Bustillo, and J. López. 2008. Optimización de la cría de Galleria mellonella
(L.) para la producción de nematodos entomopatógenos parásitos de la broca del
café.
Reese, T.A., H.E. Liang, A.M. Tager, A.D. Luster, N. Van Rooijen, D. Voehringer, and R.M.
Locksley. 2007. Chitin induces accumulation in tissue of innate immune cells
associated with allergy. Nature. 447:92-96.
Rice, S., and T. Lambkin. 2009. A new culture method for lesser mealworm, Alphitobius
diaperinus. Journal of Applied Entomology. 133:67-72.
Rios, L.A., and J.Y. Honda. 2013. New records for Blatta lateralis (Walker 1868)(Blattaria:
Blattidae) in California. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist. 89:120-121.
Rodriguez, D. 1989. A model of population dynamics for the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster
with density dependence in more than one life stage and delayed density effects. the
journal of animal ecology:349-365.
Roessingh, P., S.J. Simpson, and S. James. 1993. Analysis of phase-related changes in
behaviour of desert locust nymphs. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London.
Series B: Biological Sciences. 252:43-49.
Rose, H., and R. Wall. 2011. Modelling the impact of climate change on spatial patterns of
disease risk: Sheep blowfly strike by< i> Lucilia sericata</i> in Great Britain.
International journal for parasitology. 41:739-746.
Rosef, O., and G. Kapperud. 1983. House flies (Musca domestica) as possible vectors of
Campylobacter fetus subsp. jejuni. Applied and environmental microbiology. 45:381-
383.
Rosegrant, M.W., and S.A. Cline. 2003. Global food security: challenges and policies.
Science. 302:1917-1919.
Rueda, L., and R. Axtell. 1996. Temperature‐dependent development and survival of the
lesser mealworm, Alphitobius diaperinus. Medical and veterinary entomology. 10:80-
86.
Rychtar, J., D. Frynta, J. Tomek, Z. Varadnova, and C. Brom. 2014. Waste recycling can
promote group living: A cockroach case study. Letters in Biomathematics. 1.
Salunkhe, D.K. 1992. World oilseeds. Springer.
Sang, J.H. 1956. The quantitative nutritional requirements of Drosophila melanogaster.
Journal of Experimental Biology. 33:45-72.
Sasaki, T., M. Kobayashi, and N. Agui. 2000. Epidemiological potential of excretion and
regurgitation by Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) in the dissemination of
Escherichia coli O157: H7 to food. Journal of medical entomology. 37:945-949.
Sauvant, D., J.-M. Perez, and G. Tran. 2002. Tables de composition et de valeur nutritive
des matières premières destinées aux animaux d'élevage(porcs, volailles, bovins,
ovins, caprins, lapins, chevaux, poissons).
Sealey, W.M., T.G. Gaylord, F.T. Barrows, J.K. Tomberlin, M.A. McGuire, C. Ross, and S.
St‐Hilaire. 2011. Sensory analysis of rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss, fed
enriched black soldier fly prepupae, Hermetia illucens. Journal of the World
Aquaculture Society. 42:34-45.
Shane, S.M., M.S. Montrose, and K.S. Harrington. 1985. Transmission of Campylobacter
jejuni by the housefly (Musca domestica). Avian diseases:384-391.
Sheppard, C. 1983. House fly and lesser fly control utilizing the black soldier fly in manure
management systems for caged laying hens. Environmental entomology. 12:1439-
1442.
Siddique, H.R., S.C. Gupta, A. Dhawan, R. Murthy, D. Saxena, and D.K. Chowdhuri. 2005.
Genotoxicity of industrial solid waste leachates in Drosophila melanogaster.
Environmental and molecular mutagenesis. 46:189-197.
Silva, R., S. Zarate, H. Aguirre, and P. Aburto. 2009. Approach to the resistance of
exportation tebo worms when irradiated with gamma ray through a quarantine
treatment.
Siracusa, A., F. Marcucci, F. Spinozzi, A. Marabini, L. Pettinari, M.L. Pace, and C. Tacconi.
2003. Prevalence of occupational allergy due to live fish bait. Clinical and
experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical
Immunology. 33:507-510.
Smith, R., and Pryor, R. 2013. Enabling the exploitation of Insects as a Sustainable Source
of Protein for Animal Feed and Human Nutrition.. PROteINSECT. Retrieved from
http://www.proteinsect.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/deliverables/D5.1t-FINAL.pdf Smith,
K., and R. Wall. 1997. The use of carrion as breeding sites by the blowfly Lucilia
sericata and other Calliphoridae. Medical and Veterinary Entomology. 11:38-44.
Sogbesan, A., and A. Ugwumba. 2008. Nutritional evaluation of termite (Macrotermes
subhyalinus) meal as animal protein supplements in the diets of Heterobranchus
longifilis (Valenciennes, 1840) fingerlings. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences. 8:149-157.
Spiegel, M., M. Noordam, and H. Fels‐Klerx. 2013. Safety of Novel Protein Sources (Insects,
Microalgae, Seaweed, Duckweed, and Rapeseed) and Legislative Aspects for Their
Application in Food and Feed Production. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science
and Food Safety. 12:662-678.
Srygley, R.B. 2012. Ontogenetic changes in immunity and susceptibility to fungal infection in
Mormon crickets Anabrus simplex. J Insect Physiol. 58:342-347.
Srygley, R.B. 2014. Effects of temperature and moisture on Mormon cricket reproduction with
implications for responses to climate change. Journal of insect physiology. 65:57-62.
St‐Hilaire, S., C. Sheppard, J.K. Tomberlin, S. Irving, L. Newton, M.A. McGuire, E.E. Mosley,
R.W. Hardy, and W. Sealey. 2007. Fly prepupae as a feedstuff for rainbow trout,
Oncorhynchus mykiss. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. 38:59-67.
Stevens, L. 1992. Cannibalism in beetles. Cannibalism: ecology and evolution among
diverse taxa:256-276.
Sygo, J. 2014. Jennifer Sygo: Are you ready to eat bugs? Get past the creep and crawl factor
because insects are a great way to get protein and healthy fats. National Post.
Received 28 November 2014, from http://life.nationalpost.com/2014/03/03/jennifer-
sygo-are-you-ready-to-eat-bugs-get-past-the-creep-and-crawl-factor-because-insects-
are-a-great-way-to-get-protein-and-healthy-fats/
Tacon, A.G. 1993. Feed ingredients for warmwater fish fish meal and other processed
feedstuffs.
Taheripour, F., C. Hurt, and W.E. Tyner. 2013. Livestock industry in transition: Economic,
demographic, and biofuel drivers. Animal Frontiers. 3:38-46.
The Associated Press. 2013. U.N. promotes insects as low-fat, high-protein snack to feed the
hungry. Daily News. Received 27 November 2014, from
http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/eats/u-n-eat-bugs-good-good-world-article-
1.1342532
Thorne, G. 1940. The Hairworm Gordius robmtus Leidy as a Parasite of the Mormon Cricket
(Anabms simplex Haldeman). Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences.
30:219-231.
Tomberlin, J.K., P.H. Adler, and H.M. Myers. 2009. Development of the black soldier fly
(Diptera: Stratiomyidae) in relation to temperature. Environmental entomology.
38:930-934.
Tomberlin, J.K., and D.C. Sheppard. 2002. Factors influencing mating and oviposition of
black soldier flies (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) in a colony. Journal of Entomological
Science. 37:345-352.
Tomotake, H., M. Katagiri, and M. Yamato. 2010. Silkworm pupae (Bombyx mori) are new
sources of high quality protein and lipid. Journal of nutritional science and
vitaminology. 56:446-448.
Tuitoek, K., L. Young, C. De Lange, and B. Kerr. 1997. The effect of reducing excess dietary
amino acids on growing-finishing pig performance: an elevation of the ideal protein
concept. Journal of Animal Science. 75:1575-1583.
Van der Poel, T. 2013. College Feed formulation science. T. van der Poel, editor.
Van Huis, A. 2003. Insects as food in sub-Saharan Africa. International Journal of Tropical
Insect Science. 23:163-185.
Van Huis, A. 2009. PROGNOSE: Duur vlees zet insect op de kaart. Financieel Dagblad, pp.
68 - 72. Received 26 November 2014, from
https://www.wageningenur.nl/en/Publication-details.htm?publicationId=publication-
way-333839303636
Van Huis, A., Gurp, H., & Dicke, M. 2014. The insect cookbook : food for a sustainable
planet. New York: Columbia University Press.
Van Huis, A., J. Van Itterbeeck, H. Klunder, E. Mertens, A. Halloran, G. Muir, and P.
Vantomme. 2013. Edible insects: future prospects for food and feed security. Food
and agriculture organization of the United nations (FAO).
Van Zanten, H.H., D.G. Oonincx, H. Mollenhorst, P. Bikker, B.G. Meerburg, and I.J. de Boer.
2014. Can the environmental impact of livestock feed be reduced by using waste-fed
housefly larvae?
Veevoedertabel, C. 2000. Centraal Veevoederbureau. Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Veldkamp, T. 2012. Insects as a sustainable feed ingredient in pig and poultry diets: a
feasibility study. Wageningen UR Livestock Research.
Veltman, K., M.A. Huijbregts, M.G. Vijver, W.J. Peijnenburg, P.H. Hobbelen, J.E. Koolhaas,
C.A. van Gestel, P.C. van Vliet, and A. Jan Hendriks. 2007. Metal accumulation in the
earthworm< i> Lumbricus rubellus</i>. Model predictions compared to field data.
Environmental Pollution. 146:428-436.
Verhoeckx, K., S. van Broekhoven, C.F. den Hartog-Jager, M. Gaspari, G.A. de Jong, H.J.
Wichers, E. van Hoffen, G.F. Houben, and A.C. Knulst. 2014. House dust mite (Der p
10) and crustacean allergic patients may react to food containing Yellow mealworm
proteins. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 65:364-373.
Wageningenacademic.com,. 2014. Wageningen Academic Publishers. Retrieved 1
December 2014, from http://www.wageningenacademic.com/jiff
Wang, D., Y.y. Bai, J.h. Li, and C.x. Zhang. 2004. Nutritional value of the field cricket (Gryllus
testaceus walker). Insect Science. 11:275-283.
Wang, D., S.-W. Zhai, C.-X. Zhang, Q. Zhang, and H. Chen. 2007. Nutrition value of the
Chinese grasshopper< i> Acrida cinerea</i>(Thunberg) for broilers. Animal feed
science and technology. 135:66-74.
Wang, H., Z. Zhang, G. Czapar, M.K. Winkler, and J. Zheng. 2013. A full-scale house fly
(Diptera: Muscidae) larvae bioconversion system for value-added swine manure
reduction. Waste Management & Research:0734242X12469431.
Watson, D., J. Guy, and S. Stringham. 2000. Limited transmission of turkey coronavirus in
young turkeys by adult Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Journal of
medical entomology. 37:480-483.
WAZA. 2014. http://www.waza.org/en/zoo/choose-a-species/invertebrates/insects-and-
millipedes/blaberus-craniifer.
Westerman, P., and J. Bicudo. 2005. Management considerations for organic waste use in
agriculture. Bioresource Technology. 96:215-221.
Wikipedia,. 2014. Arnold van Huis. Retrieved 1 December 2014, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_van_Huis
Wilson, E.O. 2003. The encyclopedia of life. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 18:77-80.
Wilson, R.P. 2002. Amino acids and proteins. Fish nutrition:143.
Wood, T. 1988. Termites and the soil environment. Biology and fertility of soils. 6:228-236.
Yadav, A., and V. Garg. 2011. Industrial wastes and sludges management by
vermicomposting. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology. 10:243-
276.
Yehuda, B., U. Marchaim, L. Glatman, V. Drabkin, A. Chizov-Ginzburg, K.Y. Mumcuoglu, and
A. Gelman. 2011. Bioconversion of Poultry and Fish Waste by Lucilia Sericata and
Sarcophaga Carnaria Larvae. Asian Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution.
8:69-75.
Zhang, Z., H. Wang, J. Zhu, S. Suneethi, and J. Zheng. 2012. Swine manure
vermicomposting via housefly larvae (< i> Musca domestica</i>): The dynamics of
biochemical and microbial features. Bioresource technology. 118:563-571.
Zheng, L., Q. Li, J. Zhang, and Z. Yu. 2012. Double the biodiesel yield: Rearing black soldier
fly larvae,< i> Hermetia illucens</i>, on solid residual fraction of restaurant waste after
grease extraction for biodiesel production. Renewable Energy. 41:75-79.
ZHENG, W., Z.-g. DONG, X.-q. WANG, M. CAO, B.-l. YAN, and S.-h. LI. 2010. Effects of
Dietary Fly Maggot Musca domestica on Growth and Body Compositions in Chinese
Shrimp Fenneropenaeus chinensis Juveniles [J]. Fisheries Science. 4:003.
Zhou, Z.-h., H.-j. Yang, M. Chen, C.-f. Lou, Y.-z. Zhang, K.-p. Chen, Y. Wang, M.-l. Yu, F.
Yu, and J.-y. Li. 2008. Comparative proteomic analysis between the domesticated
silkworm (Bombyx mori) reared on fresh mulberry leaves and on artificial diet. Journal
of proteome research. 7:5103-5111.
Zuidhof, M.J., C.L. Molnar, F.M. Morley, T.L. Wray, F.E. Robinson, B.A. Khan, L. Al-Ani, and
L.A. Goonewardene. 2003. Nutritive value of house fly (Musca domestica) larvae as a
feed supplement for turkey poults. Animal Feed Science and Technology. 105:225-
230.
Zurek, L., S. Denning, C. Schal, and D. Watson. 2001. Vector competence of Musca
domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) for Yersinia pseudotuberculosis. Journal of medical
entomology. 38:333-335.