Next Article in Journal
Functional and Numerical Responses of Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) to Rhopalosiphum nymphaeae (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and Their Potential for Biological Control
Previous Article in Journal
A Treatment for Rice Straw and Its Use for Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) Feeding: Effect on Insect Performance and Diet Digestibility
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Use of Periplaneta americana as a Soybean Meal Substitute: A Step towards Sustainable Transformative Poultry Feeds

1
Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur 63100, Pakistan
2
Institute of Plant Protection, Muhammad Nawaz Shareef University of Agriculture Multan, Multan 60000, Pakistan
3
Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan 60800, Pakistan
4
Department of Entomology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad 38040, Pakistan
5
Department of Animal Nutrition, Faculty of Animal Production and Technology, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
6
Department of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, The Women University Multan, Multan 66000, Pakistan
7
Botany and Microbiology Department, College of Science, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
8
Facultad de Ciencias Agrotecnológicas, Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua, Chihuahua 31350, Chihuahua, Mexico
9
Plant Production Department, College of Food and Agricultural Sciences, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2460, Riyadh 11451, Saudi Arabia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2024, 15(9), 632; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090632
Submission received: 28 July 2024 / Revised: 17 August 2024 / Accepted: 20 August 2024 / Published: 23 August 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Insect Societies and Sociality)

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

The global supply of the primary component of poultry feed, i.e., soybean meal, has dwindled due to an imbalance between demand and supply. Hence, there is an urgent need for exploring some cost-effective and environmentally friendly alternative protein sources to ensure sustainable poultry production. The outcomes of the present study exhibited that replacing 12% of soybean meal with either Periplaneta americana or Hermetia illucens improves the growth, blood hematology, gut morphometry, and meat quality of broilers. Consequently, these insects can serve as a viable alternative to traditional protein sources in poultry nutrition, offering a promising solution to meet the rising demand for animal protein, while mitigating the environmental impacts associated with conventional feed ingredients.

Abstract

Insects are becoming increasingly popular as a sustainable and nutritious alternative protein source in poultry feeds, due to their high protein content, low environmental impact, and efficient feed conversion rates. Using insect-based feeds can reduce the need for traditional protein sources like soybean meal (SBM), which often contribute to environmental issues such as deforestation and high water consumption. The current experiments were devised to assess the impacts of the partial replacement of SBM with the American cockroach Periplaneta americana and black soldier fly Hermetia illucens on the performances, hematology, gut morphometry, and meat quality of male broilers (Ross 308). A total of 350, 1-day-old chicks weighing 40.05 ± 0.27 g were divided into 7 dietary treatments (5 pens/treatment and 10 birds/pen) at random, i.e., a 4, 8, or 12% SMB replacement with P. americana and H. illucens. Soybean meal was used as a basal diet and taken as a control. The results indicated that broilers fed on 12% P. americana or H. illucens showed significant improvements (p < 0.05) in feed conversion ratio, live weight, and daily weight gain. Hematological traits significantly improved (p < 0.05). A gut histology showed increased villus height, villus width, crypt depth, and villus height/crypt depth ratios, indicating improved nutrient absorption. Broiler meat fed on 12% P. americana meal had significantly higher redness and yellowness (p < 0.05). Substituting soybean meal with up to 12% P. americana or H. illucens meal in poultry feed can enhance the broilers’ growth performance, hematology, gut morphometry, and meat quality. Hence, these findings imply that P. americana or H. illucens meal are viable and constructive alternative protein sources in poultry nutrition, offering a sustainable approach to meet the increasing demand for animal protein across the world.

1. Introduction

The global demand for poultry meat and eggs is increasing due to the increasing human population, particularly in developing countries [1,2]. The cost effectiveness and sustainability of the poultry industry is mainly compromised due to the feed protein mainly obtained from soybean meal (SBM) and fish meal (FM) [3,4]. SBM is being extensively used in poultry feeds due to its well-suited profile of amino acids and high-quality protein content [5]. However, the rising prices of these protein sources make the poultry feed production chain less sustainable, especially in developing countries [6]. Moreover, SBM’s extensive use also brings up environmental concerns due to deforestation and higher water and pesticide usage [7,8]. Fish meal is also a high-quality protein source and used in poultry feed, but its quantity and accessibility rely heavily on the catch, which is projected to diminish in forthcoming years due to the depletion of marine resources [9,10]. Therefore, it was anticipated that the usage of insects in poultry feed as a viable alternative to traditional protein sources could benefit the poultry industry [3,11,12,13].
Nowadays, insects have attained growing interest as complementary protein sources in the poultry industry due to the high outlays for and constrained future availability of SBM and FM [14]. The promising amino acid profile, high chitin content, lauric acid, and antimicrobial agents in insects makes them a valuable source of proteins [15]. These bioactive compounds have been shown to have immunomodulatory, antibacterial, hypolipidemic, and growth-promoting effects [16,17]. Moreover, insect larvae have innate qualities that can fight off pathogens, reduce inflammation, and serve as antibiotics, helping to balance the microbial environment in the digestive tract of animals [18]. Insects are often considered as effective converters of bio-waste, do not need energy to maintain a high body temperature, and have excellent digestibility, which would otherwise lead to environmental problems [19,20]. Moreover, insects have the potential to reduce the load of bio-wastes by converting them into protein-rich sources in a limited space, efficiency in their feed conversion ratio, and high fecundity [21,22]. Furthermore, it is estimated that less than 1 ton of SBM can be produced per year from 1 hectare of land, while 150 tons of insect protein can be produced from the same area [23,24,25].
Several studies have explored the potential for substituting SBM with black soldier fly Hermetia illucens L. (Diptera: Stratiomyidae), yellow mealworm Tenebrio molitor L. (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae), the house fly Musca domestica L. (Diptera: Bombycidae), and the silkworm moth Bombyx mori L. (Lepidoptera: Bombycidae) in poultry feeds [26,27,28]. Alterations in feed content and dietary protein source have been shown to affect broilers’ growth performance, hematology, and intestinal histomorphology [29,30,31]. These factors can have an impact on nutrient digestion, which in turn influences bird growth [32,33]. Insect meal can modify the microbial community of the birds, leading to the stimulation of humoral immunity, which in turn improves the growth performance and nutrient utilization of the hosts [34]. Similarly, the polysaccharides found in the exoskeleton of certain insects also improve the overall immunity of birds [35]. Intestinal functioning (nutritional digestion and absorption) is significantly influenced in its morphology including length, muscle thickness, villus height, crypt depth, and the ratio of villus height and crypt depth [36,37].
The daily feed intake is associated with the palatability of the diet, which in turn improves the growth performances of birds [38]. The growth performances and meat quality traits of broilers are significantly influenced by nutrition. The inclusion of H. illucens larvae in poultry feed has been shown to improve the growth performance, feed efficiency, and meat quality of the birds, owing to their highly digestible amino acids (AAs) and metabolizable energy content [39,40,41]. Meat color and texture are considered to be the most crucial factors of meat quality [42]. H. illucens and M. domestica based feeds have shown to impact the meat color of broilers [27,43,44].
The poultry sector primarily depends on SBM with a minor fraction of insect meal [45]. It is healthier and more balanced to switch from SBM to insects for poultry nutrition [46,47]. The exotic insect species of tropical areas (e.g., BSF) are being used in preparing animal and human diets [48]. There is also a need to explore native and invasive insect species that are suitable for mass multiplication, having a short life-cycle, high reproductive rate, and high nutritional value [49,50].
The American cockroach, Periplaneta americana (Blattodea: Blattidae) are bred in captivity, sold, and supplied as feed for livestock and to the humans as a food or for medicines (tonic) [51,52,53]. They are inexpensive to obtain and process and are readily accessible both on farms and households [54]. They are known for being a cost-effective protein source and suggested as alternative to the meat industry [55]. To strengthen the poultry industry, P. americana may be evaluated for the replacement of SBM in poultry feed. According to our knowledge, no information is available on using P. americana in poultry feed.
The objective of the present study was to assess the impact of substituting SBM (4, 8, and 12%) with P. americana on the growth performances, hematology, intestinal structure, and meat quality attributes of broilers. The exotic species of H. illucens was maintained at comparable replacement levels for comparison.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Insects

Periplaneta americana and H. illucens were reared on a combination of different bio-wastes, such as 50% poultry, 10% fruit, 10% vegetables, 10% grains, 10% household, and 10% fish, in the entomological research laboratory at the Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan. Fully grown larvae of H. illucens and adults of P. americana were separated from the leftover of their diets by sieving and washed in hot water to kill and eradicate the bio-wastes from their body. Then, these insects were dried for 24 h at 70 °C in a hot air oven and ground using a blender. The nutritional profile, energy content, and amino acid composition of H. illucens and P. americana were assessed using proximate analysis, bomb calorimetry, and Biochrome® amino acid analyzer, as per the standard laboratory techniques at the Department of Animal Nutrition, UVAS, Ravi Campus Pattoki (Table 1).

2.2. Birds and Housing Conditions

The feeding trials were performed at the Avian Research and Training Centre, UVAS, Lahore. A total of 350 one-day-old chicks from the identical parental group were purchased from A.W. Breeders, Lahore, Pakistan. Over a span of 35 days, a total of five pens were assigned to each of the seven dietary treatments, with 10 birds in each pen. The seven experimental meals included increasing levels of SBM substitution, i.e., 4, 8, and 12%, with P. americana, and H. illucens (PA4, PA8, and PA12 for P. americana; HI4, HI8, and HI12 for H. illucens), while SBM was the basal diet considered as a control. The experiment periods had ad libitum feed and water available at all times. Proper ranking of the rice hull was maintained throughout the experiment. The temperature of the shed was kept at 34 °C for the first 5 days and then minimized to 26 °C till the end of the experiment. The chicks were immunized against infectious diseases at the hatchery. The mortality and health status of the broilers were visually monitored on a daily basis.

2.3. Formulation of Feeds

The meals were formulated based on the Ross [57] guidelines. The SBM was gradually replaced with H. illucens and P. americana at increasing levels of 4%, 8%, and 12% labeled as HI4, HI8, and HI12, PA4, PA8, and PA12, respectively. The meals were divided into three phases: starter (1–10 d), grower (11–24 d), and finisher (25–35 d). All the meals within each phase had the same caloric content and nitrogen level. The ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of the experimental treatments (starter, grower, and finisher) are presented in Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4.

2.4. Growth Performances

The growth performances of the broilers, such as live weight (LW), daily feed intake (DFI), average daily weight gain (ADG), and feed conversion ratio (FCR), were assessed to determine the effect on the meals, as described by Gariglio et al. [58]. The LW of the birds was recorded at the start of the experiment and at 10, 24, and 35 d of age. The DFI and ADG of the birds were estimated on an individual and pen basis, while the FCR was estimated for the growth intervals as well as for the entire duration of the trail.

2.5. Slaughtering

On 35 d, the birds (n = 10) were slaughtered following Sajjad et al. [59]. The LW was recorded prior to slaughter, and the head was removed after the bird was de-feathered and eviscerated. The Pectoralis major was deboned and chilled at 4 °C for 24 h after packaging in polyethylene bags, to assess meat quality traits following Ab Aziz et al. [60].

2.6. Hematology and Serum Bio-Chemistry

Hematological traits were assessed from two birds per pen (n = 10/treatment). At slaughtering, 2.5 mL blood was taken in serum-separating and EDTA tubes. For a complete blood count (CBC), blood smears were prepared from a blood droplet lacking anticoagulant [61]. The counts of white blood cells (leukocytes) and red blood cells (erythrocytes) were assessed, and the tubes lacking anticoagulant were allowed to clot upright at room temperature for two hours. Serum was separated by centrifugation at 700× g for 15 min. An automatic analyzer (Microlab 300 Semi-Automatic Chemistry Analyzer, Infitek Co., Ltd., Shandong, China) was used to check the glucose, creatinine, total protein (T. protein), globulin (Glob), cholesterol, albumin (Alb), and uric acid [62] levels. These tests were performed at the Diagnostic Lab of UVAS, Lahore.

2.7. Gut Histology

Small tissues (2 to 3 mm) of the jejunum and ileum were excised for intestinal morphometric indices, i.e., villus height (Vh), villus width (Vw), crypts depth (Cd), and Vh/Cd ratio. These segments were washed with 0.9% saline to remove feed content and preserved in 10% formalin solution for at least 72 h. Later on, the portions were placed onto slides, dyed using Lilee Meyer’s hematoxylin, and then counter-stained with eosin yellow. After staining, the oblique segments were examined under a light microscope (Meiji, Tokyo, Japan). ImageJ software (version 1.54j) was used for the analysis of images [63]. Measurements of Vh, Vw, Cd, and Vh/Cd were recorded from 20 well-oriented villi and crypts per bird [29,33]. The gut histological analysis was conducted at the Department of Anatomy and Histology, UVAS, Lahore.

2.8. Meat Quality

The impacts of P. americana and H. illucens meals on meat pH, shear force, meat color, and the drip and cooking losses of the meat were assessed using both the right and left Pectoralis major. These deboned breast muscles were chilled at 4 °C for 24 h. A pH meter (WTW, pH 3210 SET 2) was employed to evaluate the pH from three locations on the Pectoralis major. Two breast segments were utilized, one to estimate the drip loss and the other for cooking loss in percentage terms [64]. Subsequently, these cooked samples were chilled, reweighed to calculate the cooking. A Minolta CR-410 colorimete (Konica Minolta, Tokyo, Japan) was used in order to assess meat color parameters such as lightness (L*), redness (a*), and yellowness (b*) [65]. A scalpel handle blade was used to cut these breast samples in a direction parallel to the muscle fibers, resulting in rectangular pieces of approximately 1 h × 1 w × 2 L cm. A V-slot blade and a texture analyzer (TAXT plus texture analyzer, Godalming, UK) were utilized to assess the Warner–Bratzler shear force (measured in N/cm2).

2.9. Statistical Analysis

The pens were used as the experimental units to evaluate growth performance (n = 5), while individual birds were used for examining the hematology (n = 10), gut histology (n = 10), and meat quality parameters (n = 10). A completely randomized design was used for the data analysis, and Duncan’s multiple range test was conducted after a one-way analysis of variance ANOVA. Orthogonal polynomial contrasts were used to determine the linear and quadratic responses of P. americana and H. illucens to different meal concentrations. SPSS software (version 21 for Windows, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used for the statistical analysis.

3. Results

3.1. Growth Performances

The live weight, average daily gain, feed intake, and feed conversion ratio are mentioned in Table 5. There was a significant difference (p < 0.05) between the dietary treatments in terms of the LW and ADG of the birds across the experimental periods, except the DOC (p > 0.05). At 10 d of age, the maximum LW was recorded in 12% P. americana and was statistically similar in all the remaining meals. The LW was maximum in 12% H. illucens and 12% P. americana meals and minimum in the control meal at 24 and 35 d of age. H. illucens meals led to a linear increase in LW at 10 d of age, while linear and quadratic responses were observed at 24 and 35 d of age. Similarly, P. americana meals revealed linear and quadratic effects on the LW of broilers.
The maximum ADG was registered in 12% P. americana during all the feeding periods except during d 25 and 35; it was maximum in 12% H. illucens, while it was the minimum in the control treatment. The orthogonal polynomial contrasts exhibited that the ADG increased both linearly and quadratically during d 1–10, d 11–24, and d 25–35, and linearly during d 1–35 among H. illucens meals. Similarly, there were linear and quadratic effects (p < 0.05) during the experimental periods among P. americana meals.
The FI did not show a significant difference (p > 0.05) between the meals. The FCR showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) between the dietary treatments across the feeding periods. During the ages of d 1–10 and d 25–35, the highest FCR was found in the control meal, while the lowest was in 12% P. americana meal. It was the highest in the control meal and the lowest in the 12% H. illucens and 12% P. americana meals during d 11–24 and d 1–35. Among the H. illucens meals, the FCR increased quadratically during d 1–10, and linearly during d 11–24 and d1–35, as well as responding linearly and quadratically during d 25–35. There were linear and quadratic responses during d 25–35 and d 1–35 and a linear response during d 11–24 among P. americana meals.

3.2. Hematology

Complete Blood Count (CBC)

The impacts of different meals on the hematological traits of the broilers are summarized in Table 6. The hematological traits differed significantly (p < 0.05) between the meals, except monocytes (p > 0.05). The highest hemoglobin, red blood cells, and mean corpuscular hemoglobin were recorded in 12% P. americana, while the minimum was in 4% H. illucens. The mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration was maximum in 12% H. illucens and P. americana, while the minimum was in 4% H. illucens. HCT was maximum in 12% H. illucens and P. americana, while it was minimum in 8% H. illucens. The mean corpuscular volume was the maximum in 12% H. illucens and the minimum in 8% H. illucens. The platelets were the highest in 12% P. americana and the lowest in 8% H. illucens. The total leucocytes was maximum in 12% H. illucens and minimum in 4% H. illucens, while the total heterophils was maximum in 12% P. americana and minimum in 4% P. americana. There was a quadratic response in Hb and lymphocyte and a linear response in RBCs and MCHC to the H. illucens meals. There were linear and quadratic effects in HCT, MCV, MCH, platelets, TLC, and Heter to the H. illucens meals. Similarly, linear and quadratic responses were apparent in HCT, MCH, platelets, and lymphocytes to the P. americana meals, while there were quadratic effect in MCV, MCHC, TLC, and heterophils to the P. americana meals.

3.3. Serum Bio-Chemistry

The serum biochemistry traits are mentioned in Table 6. Serum bio-chemistry traits showed a significant difference (p < 0.05). The highest creatinine was recorded in the control meal and the lowest in the 12% H. illucens and P. americana diets. Glucose and cholesterol levels were the highest in the control and the lowest in 12% H. illucens. Uric acid was the maximum in the control and the minimum in 12% P. americana. The highest total protein, albumin, and globulin was in 12% P. americana and the lowest in the control meal.
Creatinine, cholesterol, total protein, and globulin registered a quadratic response in the polynomial contrasts, while albumin and uric acid showed a linear response among H. illucens meals. The H. illucens meals showed linear and quadratic responses to glucose level. Similarly, glucose and globulin exhibited linear and quadratic responses to the P. americana diets. Cholesterol, albumin, and uric acid showed a linear response, while total protein displayed a quadratic response among P. americana meals.

3.4. Gut Histology

The effects of the meals, the sites of the small intestine, and their interactions on the gut morphometric indices of the broilers are mentioned in Table 7. There was a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the experimental meals, the intestinal sites, and their interactions on gut morphometric indices such as Vh, Cd, Vw and Vh/Cd. There was an interaction between the meals and the intestinal sites, with the highest and comparable Vh values recorded at the jejunum of the broilers fed the control, 4, 8, and 12% H. illucens and 4% P. Americana—the highest at the jejunum and ileum sites when fed meals containing 8 and 12% P. americana and the lowest at the ileum site when fed the control, 4, 8, and 12% H. illucens. The largest Cd value was found at the jejunum site of the broiler fed with control meal, while the smallest Cd values were measured at the jejunum and ileum sites on 12% P. americana meal. The highest and comparable Vw values were recorded at the jejunum using the 12% H. illucens and P. americana meals. The lowest and comparable Vw values were noticed when the broilers were fed the control meal at the jejunum and ileum sites: 4 and 8% H. illucens at the ileum site and 8% P. americana at the jejunum. The largest and comparable Vh/Cd values were recorded at the jejunum when the broilers were fed with 8% H. illucens, 12% H. illucens, and 4% P. americana meals and at the jejunum and ileum sites when fed 8 and 12% P. americana meals, while the lowest and comparable were at the ileum when fed on the control, 4, 8, and 12% H. illucens and 4% P. americana meals.

3.5. Meat Quality

The effects of different meals on the meat quality parameters of the broilers are described in Table 8. The cooking loss, L*, a*, and b* differed significantly (p < 0.05) among the experimental meals, while the meat pH, drip loss, and shear force did not show a significant difference (p > 0.05). The highest cooking loss and L* was noticed in the control, while the lowest was in the 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens meals. The a* was the highest and statistically similar in 8% H. illucens, 12% H. illucens, 8% P. americana, and 12% P. americana and the lowest in the control meal. The maximum b* was recorded in 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens and the minimum in all the remaining meals. The polynomial contrasts revealed both linear and quadratic effects in cooking loss, a*, and b*, while there was a quadratic response in L* to the H. illucens meals. Similarly, cooking loss had linear and quadratic effects, whereas L*, a*, and b* had a linear effect among P. americana meals.

4. Discussion

Natural insect food sources have traditionally been an excellent choice for poultry and wild birds [66]. They are used as a protein source to meet the nutritional requirements of poultry, reduce production costs without compromising quality, and increase production rates [12]. The present research aimed to assess the effect of replacing SBM with invasive P. americana—in comparison with the commercially used H. illucens—on the growth performances, hematology, gut morphology, and meat quality traits of male broilers.

4.1. Growth Performances

Our outcomes showed that the maximum LW and ADG were recorded in 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens meals. Feed ingredients, particularly protein and essential amino acids, are critical for optimal feed utilization, which significantly impacts bird growth performance [67,68]. The digestibility of the dietary protein promotes body weight gain by accumulating protein content due to nutrient changes and feed energy content [69,70].
The results of the current study are aligned with Loponte [41] and Dabbou et al. [71], who reported that replacing 10% and 50% SBM with H. illucens improved the LW and ADG in Ross 308 broilers and barbary partridges, respectively. Hwangbo et al. [72] and Ballitoc and Sun [28] reported that the body weight increased in Ross broilers fed on 10% M. domestica and 10% T. molitor meals, respectively. Biasato et al. [73] and Ramos-Elorduy et al. [74] suggested that substituting 5% to 10% SBM with T. molitor had no effect on growth performances in Arbor Acres and Hubbard hybrid broilers. Biasato et al. [75], Biasato et al. [76], and Vasilopoulos et al. [77] suggested that replacing 10% to 15% SBM with T. molitor significantly increased LW and ADG in the fast-growing Ross 708 and Ross 308 and the intermediate-growing Hubbard hybrid.
In this study, the FI did not differ among the experimental meals. Feed intake increases as the feed’s protein and lipid content decrease, to compensate for the protein deficiency needed for proper growth [78,79,80]. Similar results were obtained by Chu et al. [81], Hwangbo et al. [72] and Ramos-Elorduy et al. [74] when broilers were fed on 3 to 9% H. illucens, 5% to 20% M. domestica, and 5% to 10% T. molitor meals, respectively. Gariglio et al. [58] also observed similar findings in Muscovy duck when fed on 9% H. illucens.
The FCR improved in broilers in our study when fed on 12% H. illucens and 12% P. americana meals. The FCR serves as an essential indicator of feed conversion efficiency in livestock production, which is mainly influenced by the nutritional value of the meal [82,83]. Substituting conventional protein sources with insects can enhance the FCR due to high nutrients, sufficient amino acids (e.g., lauric acid), an appealing palatability, easy digestion, energy efficiency, and reduced antinutritional factors [84,85]. This leads to improved growth rates and a more efficient conversion of feed into body mass in broilers [86]. Our outcomes are in line with Kim et al. [87] and Lalev et al. [88], who noticed an improved FCR at a 5% and 10% substitution of SBM with H. illucens and Bombyx mori in broilers. In broilers, an 8% inclusion of M. domestica and 10% to 30% inclusion of T. molitor have been reported to improve the FCR [17,89,90].

4.2. Hematology

Our results revealed that meals containing 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens had the maximum Hb, RBCs, MCH, MCHC, HCT, MCV, platelets, lymphocytes, and hematocrit. Blood production in the bone marrow is directly influenced by diet and the welfare of the birds [91,92]. The feed’s protein content depends on the variability in the hematological and biochemical characteristics of broilers [93,94]. Incorporating insect protein in poultry feed boosts RBC production and strengthens the immune system [95]. Biasato et al. [75] reported that the 10% T. molitor diet increased the RBCs in female Ross 708 broilers. Vilela et al. [96] observed that blood lymphocytes increased at 20% H. illucens in broilers. Our results align with Schiavone et al. [97], who found that substituting 50% to 100% soybean oil with H. illucens did not affect the blood traits in broilers (Ross 500). This discrepancy might be attributed to the variation in feed composition and breed of the boiler, i.e., soybean oil has high fat, while SBM has a high protein and fiber content.

4.3. Serum Bio-Chemistry

In the present study, 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens meals showed the maximum levels of total protein, globulin, and albumin, while they had the minimum cholesterol, glucose, creatinine, and uric acid. The chelating effects of chitin and chitosan may reduce blood uric acid, glucose, and cholesterol levels [16,98,99,100]. The birds’ metabolic function improved as cholesterol, glucose, creatinine, and uric acid levels decreased in their blood [101,102]. The nutritional composition of the diet may strengthen birds’ immunity, increasing their resilience to diseases and infections [97]. According to Bovera et al. [103], the levels of total proteins and globulin are typically affected by the isoenergetic and isoprotenic compositions of dietary treatments. Our results are consonant with prior studies by Bovera et al. [17] and Sedgh-Gooya et al. [104], who stated that 5% to 100% T. molitor diets increased the total protein and globulin levels while decreasing the uric acid in Shaver brown broilers and Bovans white laying hens. Some other studies by Schiavone et al. [97], Kim et al. [87], Schiavone et al. [105], and Sypniewski et al. [101] revealed that the levels of creatinine, uric acid, and glucose did not differ by substituting 5% to 100% soybean oil with H. illucens in broilers and turkey birds.

4.4. Gut Histology

In the present study, the interactions between the experimental diets and the sites of the small intestine were significant. The highest Vh value was observed in the jejunum of the broilers fed the control, 4%, 8%, and 12% H. illucens and 4% P. americana and at the jejunum and ileum sites fed the 8% and 12% P. americana meals. The highest Vw and Vh/Cd value were registered at the jejunum of the broilers fed the 12% H. illucens and P. americana meals, with the Cd being the smallest. Insects contain chitin, antioxidants, and antimicrobial peptides that play a key role in the development of the animal gut [66,106]. Morphological changes in the gut epithelium such as Vh and Cd are induced by the nutritive value of the diets [107]. The efficient digestion and assimilation of nutrients, as well as overall animal health, depend on the surface area of absorptive epithelium in the small intestine [36,108]. The absorption of nutrients rises as the Vh increases, while reduced nutrient uptake is indicative of poor gut development due to shorter villi [109]. Our findings are consistence with Sajjad et al. [59], who reported a significant interaction between the dietary treatments and intestinal sites (jejunum and ileum) of broilers when fed with 12% H. illucens and 12% S. frugiperda. The results of the current study diverged from the earlier studies conducted by Biasato et al. [73] and Biasato et al. [110], who found no changes in the gut histological indices such as Vh, Vw, Cd, and Vh/Cd of Ross 708 and Hubbard hybrid broilers fed with 7.5% and 15% T. molitor meals. Dabbou et al. [71] and Dabbou et al. [111] also observed similar trends in Ross 308 fed with 15% defatted H. illucens meal and modified fatted H. illucens meal. The distinctions in results between our study and the previous research could be attributed to variations in breeds, the nutritional profile of various insect species and their developmental stages, and the experimental conditions.

4.5. Meat Quality

Our results revealed that 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens meals had the lowest cooking loss and L*, while having the highest a* and b*. Meat color and texture are crucial factors that influence consumers’ acceptance of meat and its products [112,113]. The mono- and polyunsaturated fatty acid composition—oleic and linoleic—of the diets cause variations in the meat color [114]. Moreover, 20% H. illucens meal has high concentrations of saturated fatty acids; i.e., lauric acid, myristic acid, and eicosapentaenoic acid improved the meat color in broilers [96]. Several factors can influence this effect, including the pigments of the feed raw materials and the other constituents of the formulation. Consumer perception of the color may depend on their preferences [115]. The rich protein content of the diet can affect the water-holding capacity of breast meat [116]. Leiber et al. [117] reported that replacing 7.8% SBM with H. illucens decreased cooking losses in Ross 308 broilers. Our results are analogous with the findings of Murawska et al. [118], Kim et al. [119], and Schiavone et al. [44], who found that growing the substitution levels of SBM with H. illucens reduced the cooking loss while increasing the b* in broilers (Ross 308). The meat color among bird species is affected by the nature of their diet e.g., a* increased in broilers [44,96] while decreasing in quail [27] when fed with 15% H. illucens. Pieterse et al. [43] reported that the water-holding capacity of meat muscles increased and thawing and cooking losses decreased in broilers (Ross 308) fed with 10% M. domestica. Nonetheless, various factors such as diet, age, genetics, stress, and slaughtering methods can influence the quality of the meat [112].

5. Conclusions

The present study provides innovative insights into the effects of replacing SBM with the invasive P. americana in poultry feed on the growth performance, hematology, gut histology, and meat quality traits of the broilers. The results were statistically in consonance with commercially used H. illucens. The meal containing 12% P. americana and 12% H. illucens resulted in the optimal growth performance, hematology, gut histology, and meat quality traits of the chickens. The efficient feed intake and feed conversion ratio underscore the potential of P. americana as a sustainable alternative for poultry growth. Variations in the meat physicochemical indices provide valuable information about modifications in dietary treatments that may have an impact on consumer acceptability. Future research should investigate the optimal inclusion levels of other insect species in the feed of various poultry breeds, as well as the impact of insect-based diets on the gut microbiomes of poultry birds.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.S., F.M., R.T. and A.A.; methodology, F.M., M.S., E.U.K. and A.S.; software, S.Z., A.A., M.A., G.D.A.-Q., A.H. and E.F.A.; validation, A.S., M.S., R.T. and E.U.K.; formal analysis, A.A., E.U.K., S.Z., G.D.A.-Q., A.H. and E.F.A.; investigation, F.M., R.T., E.U.K. and M.A.; resources, E.U.K., M.A., G.D.A.-Q., A.H. and E.F.A.; data curation, M.S., A.A., S.Z., E.U.K., G.D.A.-Q., A.H. and E.F.A.; writing—original draft preparation, F.M., A.A., A.S. and M.S.; writing—review and editing, R.T., S.Z., M.A., G.D.A.-Q., A.H. and E.F.A.; visualization, E.U.K., R.T. and A.S.; supervision, A.S.; project administration, F.M. and M.S.; funding acquisition, A.H. and E.F.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project, Number (RSP2024R134), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The experiments were conducted following standard procedures and institutional guidelines approved by the Ethical Review Committee (No. DR/495) of the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences (UVAS), Lahore, Punjab, Pakistan.

Data Availability Statement

The data are contained within the article. Further inquiries can be directed to corresponding authors.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to extend their sincere appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project, Number (RSP2024R134), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Henchion, M.; Moloney, A.; Hyland, J.; Zimmermann, J.; McCarthy, S. Trends for meat, milk and egg consumption for the next decades and the role played by livestock systems in the global production of proteins. Animal 2021, 15, 100287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Attia, Y.A.; Rahman, M.T.; Hossain, M.J.; Basiouni, S.; Khafaga, A.F.; Shehata, A.A.; Hafez, H.M. Poultry production and sustainability in developing countries under the COVID-19 crisis: Lessons learned. Animals 2022, 12, 644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Van Huis, A. Potential of insects as food and feed in assuring food security. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 563–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Khan, S.H. Recent advances in role of insects as alternative protein source in poultry nutrition. J. Appl. Anim. Res. 2018, 46, 1144–1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Veldkamp, T.; Bosch, G. Insects: A protein-rich feed ingredient in pig and poultry diets. Anim. Front. 2015, 5, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sauer, S. Soy expansion into the agricultural frontiers of the Brazilian Amazon: The agribusiness economy and its social and environmental conflicts. Land Use Policy 2018, 79, 326–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Abro, Z.; Kassie, M.; Tanga, C.; Beesigamukama, D.; Diiro, G. Socio-economic and environmental implications of replacing conventional poultry feed with insect-based feed in Kenya. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 265, 121871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Vellinga, T.V.; van Laar, H.; Thomassen, M.; De Boer, I.; Berkhout, P.; Aiking, H. Milieueffecten van Diervoeders; 1570-8616; Animal Sciences Group: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  9. Belghit, I.; Liland, N.S.; Gjesdal, P.; Biancarosa, I.; Menchetti, E.; Li, Y.; Waagbø, R.; Krogdahl, Å.; Lock, E.-J. Black soldier fly larvae meal can replace fish meal in diets of sea-water phase Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Aquaculture 2019, 503, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Xiao, X.; Jin, P.; Zheng, L.; Cai, M.; Yu, Z.; Yu, J.; Zhang, J. Effects of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae meal protein as a fishmeal replacement on the growth and immune index of yellow catfish (Pelteobagrus fulvidraco). Aquacult. Res. 2018, 1, 1569–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Makkar, H.P.; Tran, G.; Heuzé, V.; Ankers, P. State-of-the-art on use of insects as animal feed. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2014, 197, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. De Marco, M.; Martínez, S.; Hernandez, F.; Madrid, J.; Gai, F.; Rotolo, L.; Belforti, M.; Bergero, D.; Katz, H.; Dabbou, S. Nutritional value of two insect larval meals (Tenebrio molitor and Hermetia illucens) for broiler chickens: Apparent nutrient digestibility, apparent ileal amino acid digestibility and apparent metabolizable energy. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2015, 209, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gasco, L.; Biasato, I.; Dabbou, S.; Schiavone, A.; Gai, F. Animals fed insect-based diets: State-of-the-art on digestibility, performance and product quality. Animals 2019, 9, 170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chia, S.Y.; Macharia, J.; Diiro, G.M.; Kassie, M.; Ekesi, S.; van Loon, J.J.; Dicke, M.; Tanga, C.M. Smallholder farmers’ knowledge and willingness to pay for insect-based feeds in Kenya. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0230552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Gasco, L.; Finke, M.; Van Huis, A. Can diets containing insects promote animal health? J. Insects Food Feed 2018, 4, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hossain, S.; Blair, R. Chitin utilisation by broilers and its effect on body composition and blood metabolites. Br. Poult. Sci. 2007, 48, 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Bovera, F.; Piccolo, G.; Gasco, L.; Marono, S.; Loponte, R.; Vassalotti, G.; Mastellone, V.; Lombardi, P.; Attia, Y.; Nizza, A. Yellow mealworm larvae (Tenebrio molitor, L.) as a possible alternative to soybean meal in broiler diets. Br. Poult. Sci. 2015, 56, 569–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Borrelli, L.; Coretti, L.; Dipineto, L.; Bovera, F.; Menna, F.; Chiariotti, L.; Nizza, A.; Lembo, F.; Fioretti, A. Insect-based diet, a promising nutritional source, modulates gut microbiota composition and SCFAs production in laying hens. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 16269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Mannaa, M.; Mansour, A.; Park, I.; Lee, D.-W.; Seo, Y.-S. Insect-based agri-food waste valorization: Agricultural applications and roles of insect gut microbiota. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnol. 2024, 17, 100287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Churchward-Venne, T.A.; Pinckaers, P.J.; van Loon, J.J.; van Loon, L.J. Consideration of insects as a source of dietary protein for human consumption. Nutr. Rev. 2017, 75, 1035–1045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Premalatha, M.; Abbasi, T.; Abbasi, T.; Abbasi, S. Energy-efficient food production to reduce global warming and ecodegradation: The use of edible insects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 4357–4360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Schmitt, E.; Belghit, I.; Johansen, J.; Leushuis, R.; Lock, E.-J.; Melsen, D.; Kathirampatti Ramasamy Shanmugam, R.; Van Loon, J.; Paul, A. Growth and safety assessment of feed streams for black soldier fly larvae: A case study with aquaculture sludge. Animals 2019, 9, 189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cadinu, L.A.; Barra, P.; Torre, F.; Delogu, F.; Madau, F.A. Insect rearing: Potential, challenges, and circularity. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Dossey, A.T.; Morales-Ramos, J.A.; Rojas, M.G. Insects as Sustainable Food Ingredients: Production, Processing and Food Applications; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  25. Bulak, P.; Proc, K.; Pawłowska, M.; Kasprzycka, A.; Berus, W.; Bieganowski, A. Biogas generation from insects breeding post production wastes. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 244, 118777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Maurer, V.; Holinger, M.; Amsler, Z.; Früh, B.; Wohlfahrt, J.; Stamer, A.; Leiber, F. Replacement of soybean cake by Hermetia illucens meal in diets for layers. J. Insects Food Feed 2016, 2, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Cullere, M.; Tasoniero, G.; Giaccone, V.; Miotti-Scapin, R.; Claeys, E.; De Smet, S.; Dalle Zotte, A. Black soldier fly as dietary protein source for broiler quails: Apparent digestibility, excreta microbial load, feed choice, performance, carcass and meat traits. Animal 2016, 10, 1923–1930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Ballitoc, D.A.; Sun, S. Ground yellow mealworms (Tenebrio molitor L.) feed supplementation improves growth performance and carcass yield characteristics in broilers. Open Sci. Repos. Agric. 2013, 18, e23050425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Laudadio, V.; Passantino, L.; Perillo, A.; Lopresti, G.; Passantino, A.; Khan, R.; Tufarelli, V. Productive performance and histological features of intestinal mucosa of broiler chickens fed different dietary protein levels. Poult. Sci. 2012, 91, 265–270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sajjad, M.; Sajjad, A.; Chishti, G.; Binyameen, M.; Abbasi, A.; Haq, I.; Gaafar, A.; Hodhod, M. Evaluation of blow fly, Chrysomya megacephala (Calliphoridae: Diptera) as an alternate source of protein in broiler feed. J. Insects Food Feed 2024, 1, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sajjad, M.; Binyameen, M.; Sajjad, A.; Sarmad, M.; Abbasi, A.; Khan, E.; Haq, I.; Subhan, M.; Alhimaidi, A.; Amran, R. Replacing soybean meal with lesser mealworm Alphitobius diaperinus improves broiler productive performances, haematology, intestinal morphology and meat quality. J. Insects Food Feed 2024, 1, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Malematja, E.; Manyelo, T.; Sebola, N.; Mabelebele, M. The role of insects in promoting the health and gut status of poultry. Comp. Clin. Pathol. 2023, 32, 501–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Qaisrani, S.; Moquet, P.; Van Krimpen, M.; Kwakkel, R.; Verstegen, M.; Hendriks, W. Protein source and dietary structure influence growth performance, gut morphology, and hindgut fermentation characteristics in broilers. Poult. Sci. 2014, 93, 3053–3064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Biasato, I.; Ferrocino, I.; Grego, E.; Dabbou, S.; Gai, F.; Gasco, L.; Cocolin, L.; Capucchio, M.T.; Schiavone, A. Yellow mealworm inclusion in diets for heavy-size broiler chickens: Implications for intestinal microbiota and mucin dynamics. Animals 2020, 10, 1909. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mousavi, S.; Zahedinezhad, S.; Loh, J.Y. A review on insect meals in aquaculture: The immunomodulatory and physiological effects. Int. Aquat. Res. 2020, 12, 100–115. [Google Scholar]
  36. Wang, J.; Peng, K. Developmental morphology of the small intestine of African ostrich chicks. Poult. Sci. 2008, 87, 2629–2635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Cutrignelli, M.I.; Messina, M.; Tulli, F.; Randazzo, B.; Olivotto, I.; Gasco, L.; Loponte, R.; Bovera, F. Evaluation of an insect meal of the Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens) as soybean substitute: Intestinal morphometry, enzymatic and microbial activity in laying hens. Res. Vet. Sci. 2018, 117, 209–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Islam, M.M.; Yang, C.-J. Efficacy of mealworm and super mealworm larvae probiotics as an alternative to antibiotics challenged orally with Salmonella and E. coli infection in broiler chicks. Poult. Sci. 2017, 96, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. DiGiacomo, K.; Leury, B. Insect meal: A future source of protein feed for pigs? Animal 2019, 13, 3022–3030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Detilleux, J.; Moula, N.; Dawans, E.; Taminiau, B.; Daube, G.; Leroy, P. A probabilistic structural equation model to evaluate links between gut microbiota and body weights of chicken fed or not fed insect larvae. Biology 2022, 11, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Loponte, R.; Nizza, S.; Bovera, F.; De Riu, N.; Fliegerova, K.; Lombardi, P.; Vassalotti, G.; Mastellone, V.; Nizza, A.; Moniello, G. Growth performance, blood profiles and carcass traits of Barbary partridge (Alectoris barbara) fed two different insect larvae meals (Tenebrio molitor and Hermetia illucens). Res. Vet. Sci. 2017, 115, 183–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tang, M.; Ma, Q.; Chen, X.; Ji, C. Effects of dietary metabolizable energy and lysine on carcass characteristics and meat quality in Arbor Acres broilers. Asian-Australas J. Anim. Sci. 2007, 20, 1865–1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Pieterse, E.; Pretorius, Q.; Hoffman, L.; Drew, D. The carcass quality, meat quality and sensory characteristics of broilers raised on diets containing either Musca domestica larvae meal, fish meal or soya bean meal as the main protein source. Anim. Prod. Sci. 2013, 54, 622–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Schiavone, A.; Dabbou, S.; Petracci, M.; Zampiga, M.; Sirri, F.; Biasato, I.; Gai, F.; Gasco, L. Black soldier fly defatted meal as a dietary protein source for broiler chickens: Effects on carcass traits, breast meat quality and safety. Animal 2019, 13, 2397–2405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Allegretti, G.; Talamini, E.; Schmidt, V.; Bogorni, P.C.; Ortega, E. Insect as feed: An emergy assessment of insect meal as a sustainable protein source for the Brazilian poultry industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 171, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sajid, Q.U.A.; Asghar, M.U.; Tariq, H.; Wilk, M.; Płatek, A. Insect Meal as an Alternative to Protein Concentrates in Poultry Nutrition with Future Perspectives (An Updated Review). Agriculture 2023, 13, 1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rumpold, B.A.; Schlüter, O.K. Nutritional composition and safety aspects of edible insects. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2013, 57, 802–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Kenis, M.; Rabitsch, W.; Auger-Rozenberg, M.-A.; Roques, A. How can alien species inventories and interception data help us prevent insect invasions? Bull. Entomol. Res. 2007, 97, 489–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Lourenço, F.; Calado, R.; Medina, I.; Ameixa, O.M. The potential impacts by the invasion of insects reared to feed livestock and pet animals in europe and other regions: A critical review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Barroso, F.G.; de Haro, C.; Sánchez-Muros, M.-J.; Venegas, E.; Martínez-Sánchez, A.; Pérez-Bañón, C. The potential of various insect species for use as food for fish. Aquaculture 2014, 422, 193–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ukoroije, R.B.; Bawo, D.S. Cockroach (Periplaneta americana): Nutritional value as food and feed for man and livestock. Asian Food Sci. J. 2020, 15, 37–46. [Google Scholar]
  52. Demick, J. Cockroach farms multiplying in China. Los Angeles Times Oct. 2013, 15, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  53. Sule, S.; Ojetayo, T.; Sotolu, A. Cockroach (Periplanata americana) meal nutritive composition. Magnesium (Mg) 2020, 1180, 37–46. [Google Scholar]
  54. Baiphethi, M.N.; Jacobs, P.T. The contribution of subsistence farming to food security in South Africa. Agrekon 2009, 48, 459–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Adetunmbi, T. The potential of insects as alternative animal protein source for livestock feeding. Glob. J. Agric. Sci. 2023, 22, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Abdullahi, S.; Abdulwahab, K.; Abubakar, G.S. Gross margin analysis of modern groundnut oil extraction in Gombe metropolis Gombe State, Nigeria. World J. Agric. Res. 2017, 5, 58–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Ross. Ross 308 Nutrition Specifications; Aviagen: Midlothian, UK, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  58. Gariglio, M.; Dabbou, S.; Biasato, I.; Capucchio, M.T.; Colombino, E.; Hernández, F.; Madrid, J.; Martínez, S.; Gai, F.; Caimi, C. Nutritional effects of the dietary inclusion of partially defatted Hermetia illucens larva meal in Muscovy duck. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2019, 10, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Sajjad, M.; Sajjad, A.; Chishti, G.; Khan, E.; Mozūraitis, R.; Binyameen, M. Insect Larvae as an Alternate Protein Source in Poultry Feed Improve the Performance and Meat Quality of Broilers. Animals 2024, 14, 2053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Ab Aziz, M.F.; Hayat, M.N.; Kaka, U.; Kamarulzaman, N.H.; Sazili, A.Q. Physico-chemical characteristics and microbiological quality of broiler chicken pectoralis major muscle subjected to different storage temperature and duration. Foods 2020, 9, 741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Campbell, T.W. Avian Hematology and Cytology; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  62. Germana, S.; Elisabetta, M.; Tarantola, M.; Maria, S.G.; Luca, D.; Schiavone, A. Acute phase proteins and heterophil to lymphocyte ratio in laying hens kept in different housing systems. Vet. Rec. 2010, 167, 749–751. [Google Scholar]
  63. Ferreira, T.; Rasband, W. ImageJ User Guide—IJ 1.46. 2012. Available online: http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/docs/guide (accessed on 26 September 2023).
  64. Kaić, A.; Janječić, Z.; Žanetić, A.; Kelava Ugarković, N.; Potočnik, K. EZ-DripLoss assessment in chicken breast meat using different sample areas, fiber orientation, and measurement intervals. Animals 2021, 11, 1095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Priolo, A.; Micol, D.; Agabriel, J.; Prache, S.; Dransfield, E. Effect of grass or concentrate feeding systems on lamb carcass and meat quality. Meat Sci. 2002, 62, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Elahi, U.; Xu, C.-C.; Wang, J.; Lin, J.; Wu, S.-G.; Zhang, H.-J.; Qi, G.-H. Insect meal as a feed ingredient for poultry. Anim. Biosci. 2022, 35, 332–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Zampiga, M.; Calini, F.; Sirri, F. Importance of feed efficiency for sustainable intensification of chicken meat production: Implications and role for amino acids, feed enzymes and organic trace minerals. World’s Poult. Sci. J. 2021, 77, 639–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Beski, S.S.; Swick, R.A.; Iji, P.A. Specialized protein products in broiler chicken nutrition: A review. Anim. Nutr. 2015, 1, 47–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Maharjan, P.; Martinez, D.; Weil, J.; Suesuttajit, N.; Umberson, C.; Mullenix, G.; Hilton, K.; Beitia, A.; Coon, C. Physiological growth trend of current meat broilers and dietary protein and energy management approaches for sustainable broiler production. Animal 2021, 15, 100284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Boorman, K.; Ellis, G. Maximum nutritional response to poor-quality protein and amino acid utilisation. Br. Poult. Sci. 1996, 37, 145–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Dabbou, S.; Gai, F.; Biasato, I.; Capucchio, M.T.; Biasibetti, E.; Dezzutto, D.; Meneguz, M.; Plachà, I.; Gasco, L.; Schiavone, A. Black soldier fly defatted meal as a dietary protein source for broiler chickens: Effects on growth performance, blood traits, gut morphology and histological features. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 2018, 9, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Hwangbo, J.; Hong, E.; Jang, A.; Kang, H.; Oh, J.; Kim, B.; Park, B. Utilization of house fly-maggots, a feed supplement in the production of broiler chickens. J. Environ. Biol. 2009, 30, 609–614. [Google Scholar]
  73. Biasato, I.; De Marco, M.; Rotolo, L.; Renna, M.; Lussiana, C.; Dabbou, S.; Capucchio, M.T.; Biasibetti, E.; Costa, P.; Gai, F. Effects of dietary Tenebrio molitor meal inclusion in free-range chickens. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2016, 100, 1104–1112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ramos-Elorduy, J.; González, E.A.; Hernández, A.R.; Pino, J.M. Use of Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) to recycle organic wastes and as feed for broiler chickens. J. Econ. Entomol. 2002, 95, 214–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Biasato, I.; Gasco, L.; De Marco, M.; Renna, M.; Rotolo, L.; Dabbou, S.; Capucchio, M.; Biasibetti, E.; Tarantola, M.; Bianchi, C. Effects of yellow mealworm larvae (Tenebrio molitor) inclusion in diets for female broiler chickens: Implications for animal health and gut histology. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2017, 234, 253–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Biasato, I.; Gasco, L.; De Marco, M.; Renna, M.; Rotolo, L.; Dabbou, S.; Capucchio, M.T.; Biasibetti, E.; Tarantola, M.; Sterpone, L. Yellow mealworm larvae (Tenebrio molitor) inclusion in diets for male broiler chickens: Effects on growth performance, gut morphology, and histological findings. Poult. Sci. 2018, 97, 540–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Vasilopoulos, S.; Giannenas, I.; Savvidou, S.; Bonos, E.; Rumbos, C.I.; Papadopoulos, E.; Fortomaris, P.; Athanassiou, C.G. Growth performance, welfare traits and meat characteristics of broilers fed diets partly replaced with whole Tenebrio molitor larvae. Anim. Nutr. 2023, 13, 90–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Poorghasemi, M.; Seidavi, A.; Qotbi, A.A.A.; Laudadio, V.; Tufarelli, V. Influence of dietary fat source on growth performance responses and carcass traits of broiler chicks. Asian-Australas. J. Anim. Sci. 2013, 26, 705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Van Harn, J.; Dijkslag, M.; Van Krimpen, M. Effect of low protein diets supplemented with free amino acids on growth performance, slaughter yield, litter quality, and footpad lesions of male broilers. Poult. Sci. 2019, 98, 4868–4877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, T.; Ling, H.; Zhang, W.; Zhou, Y.; Li, Y.; Hu, Y.; Peng, N.; Zhao, S. Protease or Clostridium butyricum addition to a low-protein diet improves broiler growth performance. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2022, 106, 7917–7931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Chu, X.; Li, M.; Wang, G.; Wang, K.; Shang, R.; Wang, Z.; Li, L. Evaluation of the low inclusion of full-fatted Hermetia illucens larvae meal for layer chickens: Growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and gut health. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 585843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Hancz, C.; Sultana, S.; Nagy, Z.; Biró, J. The Role of Insects in Sustainable Animal Feed Production for Environmentally Friendly Agriculture: A Review. Animals 2024, 14, 1009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. De Verdal, H.; Narcy, A.; Bastianelli, D.; Chapuis, H.; Même, N.; Urvoix, S.; Le Bihan-Duval, E.; Mignon-Grasteau, S. Improving the efficiency of feed utilization in poultry by selection. 1. Genetic parameters of anatomy of the gastro-intestinal tract and digestive efficiency. BMC Genet. 2011, 12, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Tschirner, M.; Simon, A. Influence of different growing substrates and processing on the nutrient composition of black soldier fly larvae destined for animal feed. J. Insects Food Feed 2015, 1, 249–259. [Google Scholar]
  85. Kim, S.; Chung, T.; Park, H.; Shin, M.; Park, I.; Choi, I. Effects of diet composition on growth performance and feed conversion efficiency in Alphitobius diaperinus larvae. J. Entomol. Acarol. Res. 2019, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Barragan-Fonseca, K.B.; Gort, G.; Dicke, M.; van Loon, J.J. Effects of dietary protein and carbohydrate on life-history traits and body protein and fat contents of the black soldier fly Hermetia illucens. Physiol. Entomol. 2019, 44, 148–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Kim, Y.B.; Kim, D.-H.; Jeong, S.-B.; Lee, J.-W.; Kim, T.-H.; Lee, H.-G.; Lee, K.-W. Black soldier fly larvae oil as an alternative fat source in broiler nutrition. Poult. Sci. 2020, 99, 3133–3143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Lalev, M.; Hristakieva, P.; Mincheva, N.; Oblakova, M.; Ivanova, I. Insect meal as alternative protein ingredient in broiler feed. Bulg. J. Agric. Sci. 2022, 28, 743–751. [Google Scholar]
  89. Elahi, U.; Wang, J.; Ma, Y.-B.; Wu, S.-G.; Wu, J.; Qi, G.-H.; Zhang, H.-J. Evaluation of yellow mealworm meal as a protein feedstuff in the diet of broiler chicks. Animals 2020, 10, 224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Kierończyk, B.; Rawski, M.; Józefiak, A.; Mazurkiewicz, J.; Świątkiewicz, S.; Siwek, M.; Bednarczyk, M.; Szumacher-Strabel, M.; Cieślak, A.; Benzertiha, A. Effects of replacing soybean oil with selected insect fats on broilers. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 2018, 240, 170–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Kamely, M.; He, W.; Wakaruk, J.; Whelan, R.; Naranjo, V.; Barreda, D.R. Impact of reduced dietary crude protein in the starter phase on immune development and response of broilers throughout the growth period. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020, 7, 436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Zulkifli, N.F.N.M.; Seok-Kian, A.Y.; Seng, L.L.; Mustafa, S.; Kim, Y.-S.; Shapawi, R. Nutritional value of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae processed by different methods. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0263924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Dho, M.; Candian, V.; Tedeschi, R. Insect Antimicrobial Peptides: Advancements, Enhancements and New Challenges. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Londok, J.J.M.R.; Rompis, J.E.G. Hematological Parameters in Broiler Chicken Consumed Lauric Acid and Feed Fiber. In Proceedings of the 9th International Seminar on Tropical Animal Production (ISTAP 2021), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 21–22 September 2022; pp. 144–147. [Google Scholar]
  95. Burel, C.; Lessire, M.; Juin, H.; Rousseau, P.; Hallouis, J.-M.; Aguirre, P.; Terrier, F.; Surget, A.; Pegourie, G.; Meteau, K. Feeding value of insect meals in trout and poultry: Digestibility and effect on quality of products. In Proceedings of the Insectinov 2-Production D’insectes: Alimentation-Applications-Nouvelles Filières Industrielles, Romainville, France, 10–12 October 2017; p. 38. [Google Scholar]
  96. Vilela, J.d.S.; Alvarenga, T.I.; Andrew, N.R.; McPhee, M.; Kolakshyapati, M.; Hopkins, D.L.; Ruhnke, I. Technological quality, amino acid and fatty acid profile of broiler meat enhanced by dietary inclusion of black soldier fly larvae. Foods 2021, 10, 297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Schiavone, A.; Cullere, M.; De Marco, M.; Meneguz, M.; Biasato, I.; Bergagna, S.; Dezzutto, D.; Gai, F.; Dabbou, S.; Gasco, L. Partial or total replacement of soybean oil by black soldier fly larvae (Hermetia illucens L.) fat in broiler diets: Effect on growth performances, feed-choice, blood traits, carcass characteristics and meat quality. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2017, 16, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. El-Gobary, G.; El-Zoghby, A.F.; El-Sheikh, N.; Hamdy, A.S. Effect of chito-oligosaccharide as feed additives on egg production and performance of laying hens. Egypt. J. Chem. Environ. Health 2016, 2, 183–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Khambualai, O.; Yamauchi, K.-e.; Tangtaweewipat, S.; Cheva-Isarakul, B. Effects of dietary chitosan diets on growth performance in broiler chickens. J. Poult. Sci. 2008, 45, 206–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Prajapati, B.; Patel, R. Nutrition, dietary supplements and herbal medicines: A safest approach for obesity. Res. J. Pharm. Biol. Chem. Sci. 2010, 1, 39–45. [Google Scholar]
  101. Sypniewski, J.; Kierończyk, B.; Benzertiha, A.; Mikołajczak, Z.; Pruszyńska-Oszmałek, E.; Kołodziejski, P.; Sassek, M.; Rawski, M.; Czekała, W.; Józefiak, D. Replacement of soybean oil by Hermetia illucens fat in turkey nutrition: Effect on performance, digestibility, microbial community, immune and physiological status and final product quality. Br. Poult. Sci. 2020, 61, 294–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Alagawany, M.; Ashour, E.A.; El-Kholy, M.S.; Abou-Kassem, D.E.; Roshdy, T.; Abd El-Hack, M.E. Consequences of varying dietary crude protein and metabolizable energy levels on growth performance, carcass characteristics and biochemical parameters of growing geese. Anim. Biotechnol. 2022, 33, 638–646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Bovera, F.; Loponte, R.; Marono, S.; Piccolo, G.; Parisi, G.; Iaconisi, V.; Gasco, L.; Nizza, A. Use of Tenebrio molitor larvae meal as protein source in broiler diet: Effect on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and carcass and meat traits. J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 94, 639–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Sedgh-Gooya, S.; Torki, M.; Darbemamieh, M.; Khamisabadi, H.; Abdolmohamadi, A. Effect of dietary inclusion of yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) larvae meal on productive performance, egg quality indices and blood parameters of laying hens. Anim. Prod. Sci. 2021, 61, 1365–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Schiavone, A.; Dabbou, S.; De Marco, M.; Cullere, M.; Biasato, I.; Biasibetti, E.; Capucchio, M.; Bergagna, S.; Dezzutto, D.; Meneguz, M. Black soldier fly larva fat inclusion in finisher broiler chicken diet as an alternative fat source. Animal 2018, 12, 2032–2039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Henry, M.; Gasco, L.; Chatzifotis, S.; Piccolo, G. Does dietary insect meal affect the fish immune system? The case of mealworm, Tenebrio molitor on European sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2018, 81, 204–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Abbasi, M.; Mahdavi, A.; Samie, A.; Jahanian, R. Effects of different levels of dietary crude protein and threonine on performance, humoral immune responses and intestinal morphology of broiler chicks. Braz. J. Poult. Sci. 2014, 16, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Günther, C.; Neumann, H.; Neurath, M.F.; Becker, C. Apoptosis, necrosis and necroptosis: Cell death regulation in the intestinal epithelium. Gut 2013, 62, 1062–1071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Cano-Cebrián, M.-J.; Dahlgren, D.; Kullenberg, F.; Peters, K.; Olander, T.; Sjöblom, M.; Lennernäs, H. Chemotherapeutics combined with luminal irritants: Effects on small-intestinal mannitol permeability and villus length in rats. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Biasato, I.; Ferrocino, I.; Biasibetti, E.; Grego, E.; Dabbou, S.; Sereno, A.; Gai, F.; Gasco, L.; Schiavone, A.; Cocolin, L. Modulation of intestinal microbiota, morphology and mucin composition by dietary insect meal inclusion in free-range chickens. BMC Vet. Res. 2018, 14, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Dabbou, S.; Lauwaerts, A.; Ferrocino, I.; Biasato, I.; Sirri, F.; Zampiga, M.; Bergagna, S.; Pagliasso, G.; Gariglio, M.; Colombino, E. Modified black soldier fly larva fat in broiler diet: Effects on performance, carcass traits, blood parameters, histomorphological features and gut microbiota. Animals 2021, 11, 1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Mir, N.A.; Rafiq, A.; Kumar, F.; Singh, V.; Shukla, V. Determinants of broiler chicken meat quality and factors affecting them: A review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 54, 2997–3009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Yang, C.; Li, X.; Li, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Li, W.; Jiang, X. Evaluation for meat quality performance of broiler chicken. J. Anim. Vet. Adv. 2011, 10, 949–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Benzertiha, A.; Kierończyk, B.; Rawski, M.; Kołodziejski, P.; Bryszak, M.; Józefiak, D. Insect oil as an alternative to palm oil and poultry fat in broiler chicken nutrition. Animals 2019, 9, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Wideman, N.; O’bryan, C.; Crandall, P. Factors affecting poultry meat colour and consumer preferences—A review. World’s Poult. Sci. J. 2016, 72, 353–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Benahmed, S.; Askri, A.; de Rauglaudre, T.; Létourneau-Montminy, M.-P.; Alnahhas, N. Effect of reduced crude protein diets supplemented with free limiting amino acids on body weight, carcass yield, and breast meat quality in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 2023, 102, 103041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Leiber, F.; Gelencsér, T.; Stamer, A.; Amsler, Z.; Wohlfahrt, J.; Früh, B.; Maurer, V. Insect and legume-based protein sources to replace soybean cake in an organic broiler diet: Effects on growth performance and physical meat quality. Renew. Agric. Food Syst. 2017, 32, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Murawska, D.; Daszkiewicz, T.; Sobotka, W.; Gesek, M.; Witkowska, D.; Matusevičius, P.; Bakuła, T. Partial and total replacement of soybean meal with full-fat black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens L.) larvae meal in broiler chicken diets: Impact on growth performance, carcass quality and meat quality. Animals 2021, 11, 2715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kim, B.; Kim, H.R.; Lee, S.; Baek, Y.-C.; Jeong, J.Y.; Bang, H.T.; Ji, S.Y.; Park, S.H. Effects of dietary inclusion level of microwave-dried and press-defatted black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae meal on carcass traits and meat quality in broilers. Animals 2021, 11, 665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Nutritional profile, energy content, and amino acid composition of H. illucens and P. Americana.
Table 1. Nutritional profile, energy content, and amino acid composition of H. illucens and P. Americana.
Nutrient Composition (%)H. illucensP. americana
Dry matter (as such basis)91.0092.00
Crude protein42.0040.40
Crude fat32.6011.02
Ash10.706.78
Crude fiber9.406.08
Nitrogen-free extract5.3029.72
Calcium2.101.29
Phosphorus (available) 0.940.52
Energy Content (kcal/kg)H. illucensP. americana
Gross energy50104250
Metabolizable energy a14641239
Essential amino acids (%)H. illucensP. americana
Arginine2.265.36
Lysine3.138.20
Methionine1.222.37
Threonine1.883.53
Leucine3.117.86
Isoleucine2.544.02
Valine3.084.21
Dispensable Amino Acids (%)H. illucensP. americana
Cysteine0.403.65
Tryptophan0.271.66
Glycine3.063.43
Glutamic acid11.3212.07
Proline2.892.50
Tyrosine3.313.31
Phenylalanine4.323.47
a Metabolizable energy was estimated using the equations of Abdullahi et al. [56]. The sample was analyzed in triplicate.
Table 2. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Table 2. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Starter Meals
Ingredients (%)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Corn grain51.1751.9354.3555.5751.9254.1054.80
Wheat bran4.004.003.003.004.003.003.00
Rice polishing4.004.004.004.004.004.003.00
Soybean oil4.003.001.800.803.002.002.40
Soybean meal 28.5025.0021.0017.0025.0021.0017.00
Fish meal 6.006.006.006.006.006.006.00
HI meals-4.008.0012.00---
PA meals----4.008.0012.00
L-Lysine HCl0.03------
DL-Methionine0.150.120.100.070.120.100.07
Common salt0.300.300.300.300.300.300.30
Limestone1.751.551.351.161.551.501.40
Micro Min Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Vitamin Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Total100100100100100100100
Nutrient composition, %ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Dry matter89.4089.4089.5089.4089.4089.5089.40
Crude protein 23.0023.0323.0022.9823.0323.0023.02
Ether extract6.656.726.806.866.626.706.76
Crude fiber4.064.224.274.364.224.274.26
Ash3.623.853.963.803.853.963.80
Nitrogen-free extract (NFE) b61.0060.9860.8460.9460.9860.8460.94
Calcium0.950.950.950.950.950.950.95
Phosphorus (available) c0.510.510.520.520.510.520.52
Lysine1.321.321.331.331.321.331.33
Methionine0.550.550.550.550.550.550.55
Threonine0.880.890.900.900.890.900.90
Valine1.031.041.031.041.041.031.04
Arginine1.411.411.421.401.411.421.40
Leucine1.461.461.441.451.461.441.45
Isoleucine0.880.890.880.890.890.880.89
Energy content (kcal/kg)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Gross Energy d4606459345984604459345984604
Metabolizable Energy e2980297829732974297829732974
HI4, 4% H. illucens; HI8, 8% H. illucens; HI12, 12% H. illucens; PA4, 4% P. americana; PA8, 8% P. americana; PA12, 12% P. americana; a standard vitamin and mineral premix of Trouw Nutrition GB, The Netherlands, was used for the starter meals; b NFE, c phosphorus (avail.) and e metabolizable energy were calculated, while all other ingredients were analyzed. d Gross energy was estimated using the Bomb Calorimeter IKA C2000 (Werke GmbH, Sauerlach, Germany); e ME was estimated using the equations of Abdullahi et al. [56].
Table 3. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Table 3. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Grower Meals
Ingredients (%)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Corn grain51.1751.9354.3555.5755.0056.1057.20
Wheat bran4.004.003.003.005.004.003.00
Rice polishing4.004.004.004.004.004.004.00
Soybean oil 4.003.001.800.803.303.002.80
Soybean meal 28.5025.0021.0017.0022.0018.3014.50
Fish meal6.006.006.006.005.005.005.00
HI meals-4.008.0012.00---
PA meals----4.008.0012.00
L-Lysine HCl0.03------
DL-Methionine0.150.120.100.070.05--
Common salt0.300.300.300.300.300.300.30
Limestone1.751.551.351.161.251.201.10
Micro Min Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Vitamin Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Total100100100100100100100
Nutrient composition, %ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Dry matter89.4089.4089.5089.4089.3089.5089.40
Crude protein 23.0023.0323.0022.9821.5021.5121.50
Ether extract6.656.726.806.867.087.107.09
Crude fiber4.064.224.274.364.184.274.31
Ash3.623.853.963.803.553.683.81
Nitrogen-free extract (NFE) b61.0060.9860.8460.9462.2061.8961.13
Calcium0.950.950.950.950.750.750.75
Phosphorus (available) c0.510.510.520.520.420.420.43
Lysine1.321.321.331.331.191.191.19
Methionine0.550.550.550.550.510.510.51
Threonine0.880.890.900.900.790.790.79
Valine1.031.041.031.040.920.910.92
Arginine1.411.411.421.401.271.281.27
Leucine1.461.461.441.451.301.311.30
Isoleucine0.880.890.880.890.810.800.80
Energy content (kcal/kg)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Gross Energy d4606459345984604465946644671
Metabolizable Energy e2980297829732974304930483051
HI4, 4% H. illucens; HI8, 8% H. illucens; HI12, 12% H. illucens; PA4, 4% P. americana; PA8, 8% P. americana; PA12, 12% P. americana; a standard vitamin and mineral premix of Trouw Nutrition GB, The Netherlands, was used for the grower meals; b NFE, c phosphorus (avail.) and e metabolizable energy were calculated, while all other ingredients were analyzed. d Gross energy was estimated using the Bomb Calorimeter IKA C2000 (Werke GmbH, Germany); e ME was estimated using the equations of Abdullahi et al. [56].
Table 4. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Table 4. Ingredients, nutrient composition, and energy content of meals.
Finisher Meals
Ingredients (%)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Corn grain57.2758.6561.0063.2458.1759.4760.85
Wheat bran5.005.004.003.005.004.003.00
Rice polishing4.004.004.004.004.004.004.00
Soybean oil5.504.303.202.004.804.404.10
Soybean meal 22.5018.5014.5010.7018.5014.5010.70
Fish meal 4.004.004.004.004.004.004.00
HI meals-4.008.0012.00---
PA meals----4.008.0012.00
L-Lysine HCl0.040.030.03----
DL-Methionine0.140.120.090.060.080.03-
Common salt0.300.300.300.300.300.300.30
Limestone1.151.000.780.601.051.000.95
Micro Min Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Vitamin Premix a0.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Total100100100100100100100
Nutrient composition, %ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Dry matter89.4089.3089.6089.5089.3089.6089.50
Crude protein 19.5219.5319.5119.5219.5329.5119.52
Ether extract8.068.088.118.138.088.118.10
Crude fiber3.994.044.084.104.044.084.10
Ash3.443.543.533.573.543.533.57
NFE b63.8263.6963.5063.4063.6963.5063.43
Calcium0.650.660.650.660.660.650.66
Phosphorus (available) c0.360.360.360.360.360.360.36
Lysine1.081.081.091.081.081.091.08
Methionine0.480.480.480.480.480.480.48
Threonine0.720.720.720.720.720.720.72
Valine0.840.840.840.850.840.840.85
Arginine1.171.181.171.181.181.171.18
Leucine1.191.191.191.201.191.191.20
Isoleucine0.750.750.760.750.750.760.75
Energy content (kcal/kg)ControlHI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12
Gross Energy d4733472847194713472847194713
Metabolizable Energy e3124311231053102311231053102
HI4, 4% H. illucens; HI8, 8% H. illucens; HI12, 12% H. illucens; PA4, 4% P. americana; PA8, 8% P. americana; PA12, 12% P. americana; a standard vitamin and mineral premix of Trouw Nutrition GB, The Netherlands, was used for the finisher meals; b NFE, c phosphorus (avail.) and e metabolizable energy were calculated, while all other ingredients were analyzed. d Gross energy was estimated using the Bomb Calorimeter IKA C2000 (Werke GmbH, Germany); e ME was estimated using the equations of Abdullahi et al. [56].
Table 5. Growth performances of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
Table 5. Growth performances of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
ItemsControlHermetia illucensPeriplaneta americanaSEMp-Value
HI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12ANOVAHI Lin.HI Quad. PA Lin.PA Quad.
Live weight, g
DOC40.1840.0639.9540.0640.0240.0340.080.060.990.830.510.6340.752
10 d247.3 bc257.5 abc236.39 c306.17 ab265.67 abc294.52 abc318.83 a3.470.040.010.943<0.001<0.001
24 d1022.67 f1076.5 e1133.33 c1216.67 a1111.5 d1172.83 b1205.67 a14.58<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
35 d1990.3 d2012.27 cd2120.8 b2126.3 ab2038.3 c2105.4 b2159.67 a14.05<0.001<0.0010.009<0.001<0.001
Daily weight gain, g
1–10 d22.98 f 24.72 e26.58 d30.62 b25.76 ab 29.44 c31.88 a0.66<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
11–24 d55.38 f58.50 e63.38 bc 64.07 ab 60.41 d62.75 c65.05 a0.72<0.001<0.0010.025<0.0010.046
25–35 d82.66 e 85.07 d86.73 c89.78 a 84.26 d84.78 d87.96 b 0.51<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
1–35 d56.87 d57.49 cd60.59 b60.76 ab58.24 c60.15 b61.71 a0.4<0.001<0.0010.601<0.001<0.001
Feed intake, g
1–10 d22.7423.8423.1823.5924.3623.8423.110.420.980.6600.7200.6550.506
11–24 d94.3192.7892.1790.1591.2390.8490.660.640.70.0740.8680.1780.923
25–35 d177.44177.19176.40176.77177.76176.01178.030.370.820.5610.7740.9230.770
1–35 d98.1697.9497.2596.8497.7996.9097.270.30.910.3290.9280.3670.839
Feed conversion ratio, g/g
1–10 d0.98 a0.93 ab0.92 ab0.77 bc0.92 ab0.81 abc0.72 c0.030.030.0820.0410.0810.079
11–24 d1.70 a1.59 b1.44 cd1.39 d1.51 bc1.45 cd1.43 cd0.05<0.001<0.0010.139<0.0010.713
25–35 d2.14 a 2.09 bc2.05 cd2.02 d2.11 ab2.08 bc1.96 e0.01<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0440.029
1–35 d 1.73 a1.70 ab1.60 c1.59 c1.68 b1.61 c1.58 c0.01<0.001<0.0010.593<0.0010.004
Orthogonal polynomial contrast; HI lin., H. illucens linear; HI quad., H. illucens quadratic; PA lin., P. americana linear; PA quad., P. americana. The values marked by different letters in superscript within the rows were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Table 6. Hematology and serum bio-chemistry of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
Table 6. Hematology and serum bio-chemistry of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
TraitsControlHermetia illucensPeriplaneta americanaSEMp-Value
HI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12ANOVAHI Lin.HI Quad.PA Lin.PA Quad.
Hematology
Hb8.9 c8.33 d9.9 ab10 ab9.67 b9.7 b10.3 a0.15<0.0010.120.0010.5920.946
RBCs2.83 bc2.57 c3.03 bc3.1 ab2.87 bc3.03 bc3.53 a0.080.020.030.5610.1750.348
HCT32.36 c30.07 e26.63 f35.3 a31.06 d33.2 b35.33 a0.64<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
MCV98.06 d89.73 e83.17 f113.83 a100.13 c97.23 d105.33 b2.06<0.0010.004<0.0010.981<0.001
MCH31.77 c25.73 f29.5 e32.87 b31.23 d29.37 e34.23 a0.58<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
MCHC32.43 d30.3 e33.33 c36.27 a32.73 d34.27 b36.53 a0.46<0.001<0.0010.1540.2210.004
Platelets13,966.67 e16,666.17 d13,033.23 f29,033.13 b14,666.47 e23,033.33 c31,033.30 a1552.16<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
TLC11,000 d6533.33 g10,066.67 e17,466.67 a9200 f13,100 c14,033.33 b744.15<0.0010.004<0.0010.585<0.001
Heter.36.07 d44.33 c50.33 b50.33 b36.67 d50.33 b62.67 a1.92<0.001<0.001<0.0010.539<0.001
Lym.33.67 c44.67 b45 b56.67 a33.33 c45.33 b56.33 a1.99<0.0010.09<0.001<0.0010.005
Mono.22222220.140.450.4290.1050.7340.855
Serum bio-chemistry
Creatinine0.53 a0.43 ab0.4 b0.23 c0.33 bc0.33 bc0.23 c0.03<0.0010.1560.040.080.394
Glucose212.67 a201.33 b196.33 c135.67 f204.67 b172.33 e192.33 d1.45<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
Cholesterol152.67 a154.33 a142.17 bc120.33 d140.33 bc143.33 b138.67 c1.2<0.0010.1730.007<0.0010.224
T. Protein2.73 d3.33 bc3.37 bc3.53 b2.93 d3.23 c4.13 a0.1<0.0010.5650.0050.857<0.001
Alb.1.2 d1.3 cd1.4 bc1.5 ab1.3 cd1.5 ab1.6 a0.030.030.010.580.0020.487
Glob.1.43 e1.63 de2.17 bc2.33 ab1.63 de1.9 cd2.63 a0.01<0.0010.070.0060.02<0.001
Uric acid4.63 a3.43 d4.13 b3.63 cd4.23 b3.83 c3.53 d0.02<0.001<0.0010.63<0.0010.832
Traits as follow: Hb g/dL, hemoglobin; RBCs × 106/µL, red blood cells; HCT %, hematocrits; MCV fL, mean corpuscular volume; MCH pg, mean corpuscular hemoglobin; MCHC, mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration; platelets/µL; TLC × 103/µL, total leucocytes; Heter. (%), heterophils; Lym. (%), lymphocytes; Mono. (%), monocytes; creatinine mg/dL; glucose mg/dL; cholesterol mg/dL; T. protein g/dL, total protein; Alb. g/dL, albumin; Glob. g/dL, globulin; uric acid g/dL. The values marked by different letters in superscript within the rows were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Table 7. Gut morphometric indices of broilers as affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
Table 7. Gut morphometric indices of broilers as affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
DietSiteVhCdVwVh/Cd
ControlJejunum1407.2 abcd187.76 a43.40 ef7.92 bcdef
Ileum1026.6 e177.82 cd43.20 ef5.47 g
HI4Jejunum1357.2 abcd182.28 b61.67 bc7.65 bcdef
Ileum1133.0 de177.53 cd46.01 def6.21 fg
HI8Jejunum1421.4 abcd175.62 de74.70 a8.26 abcd
Ileum1106.9 de172.03 fg47.53 def6.31 efg
HI12Jejunum1559.7 ab164.26 h70.16 ab9.38 ab
Ileum1158.5 cde166.28 h51.05 cde7.04 cdefg
PA4Jejunum1473.2 abc178.84 c50.63 cde8.41 abcd
Ileum1237.1 bcde175.07 de49.09 def6.92 defg
PA8Jejunum1392.4 abcd173.18 ef37.91 f8.22 abcde
Ileum1541.7 ab169.45 g50.79 cde8.90 abc
PA12Jejunum1602.7 a161.23 i74.79 a9.95 a
Ileum1478.7 abc161.00 i55.43 cd9.17 ab
PSEM 18.293.401.690.34
Probability
Meals <0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
Sites <0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
Meals * Sites 0.002<0.0010.003<0.001
PSEM, pooled standard error of mean. * Effects of two variables have been combined in ANOVA analyses. The values marked by different letters in superscript within the rows were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Table 8. Meat quality traits of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
Table 8. Meat quality traits of broilers affected by H. illucens and P. americana meals.
TraitsControlHermetia illucensPeriplaneta americanaSEMp-Value
HI4HI8HI12PA4PA8PA12ANOVAHI Lin. 1HI Quad. 1PA Lin. 1PA Quad. 1
Meat pH6.096.116.126.146.136.116.120.010.2820.5660.4910.1890.625
Drip loss (%)2.452.322.452.192.302.112.420.810.6930.4270.5070.3040.985
Shear force61.0361.0260.8461.0760.8660.8860.930.030.1590.8050.1200.2190.435
Cooking loss (%)33.32 a26.12 c18.10 e18.70 e29.32 b 21.10 d20.20 de1.68<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001
L*58.75 a 57.17 ab 54.70 bc48.94 d56.67 abc 53.14 c49.61 d0.86<0.0010.4470.0010.0040.701
a*12.35 c13.87 b 16.02 a16.29 a 13.70 b16.13 a16.23 a0.25<0.0010.04<0.001<0.0010.351
b*19.15 b18.44 b18.31 b21.32 a19.28 b19.09 b21.03 a0.60.030.026<0.001<0.0010.868
1 Orthogonal polynomial contrast, HI lin., H. illucens linear; HI quad., H. illucens quadratic; PA lin., P. americana linear; PA quad., P. americana; L*, lightness; a*, redness; b*, yellowness; The values marked by different letters in superscript within the rows were significantly different (p < 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Mustafa, F.; Sajjad, A.; Tahir, R.; Ali, M.; Sajjad, M.; Abbasi, A.; Khan, E.U.; Zafar, S.; Hashem, A.; Avila-Quezada, G.D.; et al. Use of Periplaneta americana as a Soybean Meal Substitute: A Step towards Sustainable Transformative Poultry Feeds. Insects 2024, 15, 632. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090632

AMA Style

Mustafa F, Sajjad A, Tahir R, Ali M, Sajjad M, Abbasi A, Khan EU, Zafar S, Hashem A, Avila-Quezada GD, et al. Use of Periplaneta americana as a Soybean Meal Substitute: A Step towards Sustainable Transformative Poultry Feeds. Insects. 2024; 15(9):632. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090632

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mustafa, Farwa, Asif Sajjad, Roughaina Tahir, Mudssar Ali, Muhammad Sajjad, Asim Abbasi, Ehsaan Ullah Khan, Saba Zafar, Abeer Hashem, Graciela Dolores Avila-Quezada, and et al. 2024. "Use of Periplaneta americana as a Soybean Meal Substitute: A Step towards Sustainable Transformative Poultry Feeds" Insects 15, no. 9: 632. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15090632

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop