Next Article in Journal
Bioprocessing of Sargassum fusiforme via Lactobacillus Fermentation: Effects on Nutrient Composition, Organoleptic Properties, and In Vitro Antioxidant and Hypoglycemic Activities
Previous Article in Journal
Edible Insects from the Perspective of Sustainability—A Review of the Hazards and Benefits
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Insects as Source of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant, Antihypertensive, and Antidiabetic Properties: Focus on the Species Approved in Europe up to 2024

Department of Biotechnologies, Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Siena, Via Aldo Moro 2, I-53100 Siena, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2025, 14(8), 1383; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081383
Submission received: 12 March 2025 / Revised: 8 April 2025 / Accepted: 15 April 2025 / Published: 17 April 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Food Security and Sustainability)

Abstract

:
Insects represent a traditional food in different parts of the world, where eating insects is not only related to nutrition, but also results from a variety of sociocultural customs. Insects’ nutritional profiles typically vary by species. Nevertheless, in terms of nutrition, edible insects can be a rich source of protein, dietary fiber, healthy fatty acids, and micronutrients, including minerals and vitamins. Insects have a low carbon footprint and require fewer resources in terms of land, water, and food with respect to animal livestock. Interestingly, insects are a source of bioactive compounds with different pharmacological activities, including antioxidant, antimicrobial, antidiabetic, antiobesity, antihypertensive, and antilipidemic. Among the bioactive compounds, polyphenols, chitosan, and protein hydrolysates are the most important ones, with direct activity on ROS quenching and enzymatic inhibition. Glucosidase, DPP-IV, ACE, and lipases are directly inhibited by insects’ bioactive peptides. Lipids and tocopherols reduce inflammation and lipid peroxidation by acting on LOX and COX-2 enzymes and on ROS quenching. The insects’ nutrient composition, coupled with their easy and economical breeding, is the cause of the growing interest in edible insects. During the last 20 years, the study and development of novel insect-based products increased, with relevant effects on the market. This review focuses on the edible insects currently approved in Europe, namely, Acheta domesticus, Alphitobus diaperinus, Locusta migratoria, and Tenebrio molitor. The nutrient profile and the functional compounds are examined, with an eye on market trends and on the patent applications filed in the last decades.

1. Introduction

Insects are the largest arthropod class, with more than 1 million species described; among them, more than 2100 are edible [1]. Most of the edible species have been eaten for centuries in Africa, Asia, Oceania, or Latin America, and are thus perfectly safe for human consumption. Even if entomophagy is part of the traditional culinary culture of billions of people worldwide, eating insects is uncommon and often not acceptable for many people in the EU countries [2,3]. This phenomenon, known as entomophobia, is probably related to the novelty represented by the introduction of novel foods, as already experienced for tomatoes in the 1500s and sushi in the early 1900s. The market size for insect protein has been estimated at more than 235 million worldwide in 2023, and it is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 28.9% in the next ten years [4]. According to recent reports, the European market for edible insects is projected to reach 2.98 billion by 2032 [5]. The EU market growth is probably related to the increasing interest in climate change and to the favorable opinion of scientists and institutions about insects [6]. The major consumers are the Netherlands, Germany, the UK, France, and Belgium; nevertheless, the animal nutrition segment has the highest market share. According to the Forbes data, in Germany only the market had an annual growth of 24% in the last six years [7]. The key companies are Ÿnsect (SAS) (Évry-Courcouronnes, France), Protix B.V. (S Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands), InnovaFeed SAS (Paris, France), EntoCube OY (Espoo, Finland), Cricket Lab Limited (London, UK), and BIOFLYTECH S.L. (Fuente Alamo de Murcia, Spain), while other small and medium-sized enterprises are being established.
According to recent reports, there are notable variations between the countries. Even if the insect consumption is high in the regions that traditionally consume insects, more people in Portugal, Poland, Slovenia, and Spain are inclined to try insects. Curiosity or a shortage of food were determined to be the main drivers of insect consumption [8]. The major concerns are related to the safety of edible insects, in particular the presence of allergens and contamination with persistent organic pollutants, mycotoxins, or microorganisms [9]. Accordingly, novel industrial processing technologies are rapidly expanding, with an eye on the reduction of waste and the development of novel products from by-products [10].
Population growth is one of the challenges of our time. As reported by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) [11], millions of people experience food insecurity and malnutrition due to the cost of healthy diets. Furthermore, it is impossible to produce an adequate quantity of proteins with current farming methods due to the low sustainability of the process. In 2013, the FAO pointed out the potential application of insects as food and feed, highlighting the advantages and pitfalls of this resource [12]. Insects are considered a complete and healthy food because they have a balanced amount of nutrients. The protein content is similar to fish but different from vegetables, comprising all of the essential amino acids in the recommended ratios [13]. Interestingly, insects have high-quality fat with short-chain fatty acids amounting to less than 40%, and some of them are also a valuable source of micronutrients such as iron and vitamin B12. The nutrient concentration differs based on the species. The most interesting characteristic is the quantity of micronutrients, in particular, minerals and vitamins, that can be exploited in controlled regimens. Analyzing feed conversion efficiency, insects have lower land and hydric requirements [14,15,16] and water pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in comparison to conventional livestock [17]. Furthermore, higher fecundity, less susceptibility to diseases and zoonosis [18], and higher feed conversion efficiency are other factors contributing to their increasing popularity [16,19]. Recent studies demonstrate that insects can be reared in a multiplicity of by-products, upcycling them in the productive stream. Insects are also advantageous in terms of emissions, producing less greenhouse gases (GHGs) and ammonia than mammals [20]. These characteristics make them suitable as protein sources, also for developing countries [21]. Nowadays, the food demand is increasing, and so is the need for a more sustainable and equally distributed food supply chain [22].
The aim of a circular bioeconomy prompts the research for alternative and innovative food sources to protect both the climate and the environment [23]. According to this vision, edible insects have received particular attention in recent years [24] as a promising alternative to meet the increasing food demand while providing high nutritional value [25]. Despite the practice of eating insects being ancient, entomophagy is currently in the spotlight for its potential as a novel and sustainable food system [26].
As reported in a recent survey by IPIFF, consumer acceptance should be increased thanks to the nutraceutical substances of insects [27]. In fact, edible insects have an important antioxidant activity, which is related to their functional properties. Among the bioactive compounds, there are chitosan and a large number of peptides with proven antihypertensive and antimicrobial properties [28]. Another important advantage is the antiobesity effect of chitosan, which, coupled with the increased level of satiety of certain species, can represent a valuable solution for controlled regimens. Preliminary results showed that the effects on satiety are species-specific and depend on the quantity of insect flour ingested.
According to the European regulation EU 2015/2283, novel foods for human consumption can be marketed only after a positive evaluation by the European Food Safety and Authority (EFSA). Accordingly, two species of insects have been approved in 2021, Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML) and Locusta migratoria (LM) [29,30]. In early 2023, two other species were approved by the EFSA: house crickets (AD) (Acheta domesticus) and the larvae of Alphitobius diaperinus [31,32]. This review focuses on the edible insects currently approved in Europe, namely, Acheta domesticus, Alphitobus diaperinus, Locusta migratoria, and Tenebrio molitor. The nutrient profile and the nutraceuticals are examined, with an eye on market trends and on the patent applications filed in the last decades.

2. Edible Insects Approved in Europe

Tenebrio molitor (TM), also known as yellow mealworm, is a species of darkling beetle of the family Tenebrionidae, order Coleoptera (Phylum Arthropoda, Class Insecta) [33]. As the Latin etymology of the name suggests, these insects prefer dark environments and are common storage pests [34], mainly distributed in the northern temperate regions [35]. TM is a holometabolic insect, and its life cycle goes through four different development stages, egg, larva, pupa, and adult [36], characterized by significant changes in the mealworm morphologies [37]. Environmental conditions such as diet, temperature, relative humidity, darkness, and population density are crucial points for the developmental stages of TM [14,15,16,38]. TM can be reared in very simple conditions by untrained personnel, using different diets (wheat bran and enrichment with organic matter, i.e., potatoes, carrots, apples) and limited space [39]. Tropical regions have a long tradition of entomophagy [40], and this insect is consumed at the larval stage in many areas of Africa, Asia, and Latin America [41,42,43,44]. Despite insect consumption still encountering barriers in Western countries, according to the EFSA [45], TM belongs to the list of insects with the highest potential as food and feed; TM larvae (TML) were the first insect-based novel food authorized [46] by EFSA in 2021. Specifically, EFSA stated that the consumption of TML in the form of powder or as dried insects used as ingredients in various food products does not raise any safety concerns and has a low allergenic risk.
The term “migratory locust” refers to the adult stage of the insect species Locusta migratoria, which is a member of the genus Locusta and subfamily Locustinae of the family Acridae [47]. These insects represent the most widespread grasshopper species in the world and are currently present in various regions, including Australia, Asia, Africa, and Europe [29]. LM exists in two phenotypes, solitary and gregarious, determined by the environment [48]. These insects are consumed in 65 countries, especially in Africa and Asia, and they are prepared in different ways, including boiling, toasting, roasting, frying, and sun-drying. Due to their short life cycles, locusts can reach adulthood in four to eight weeks, depending on their rearing conditions. Since they may be raised vertically, less land is needed for their upkeep. The nutritional and chemical composition of Locusta migratoria suggests that it can be a healthy food source for people and a viable treatment to ward off a variety of illnesses.
In 2018, the company Fair Insects BV (a Protix Company) submitted a request to the European Commission to authorize placing migratory locusts on the market as a novel food in frozen form without legs and wings, dried form without legs and wings, or powder form with legs and wings. Removal of wings and legs in frozen and dried formulations allows for reducing intestinal constipation brought on by ingesting the big spines on the insect’s tibia. Fair Insects BV proposed to use this novel food as an ingredient in various food products such as breakfast cereals, pasta, bakery products, sauces, meat products, and meat imitates. Products with one of the migratory locusts’ formulations could be consumed by the general population. After careful study of the submitted data regarding the nutritional content by the applicant, the EFSA authorized the placing of the migratory locust reared and harvested during the solitary phase as novel food on the market. On 25 May 2021, the EFSA panel stated the safety of frozen and dried formulations from migratory locusts, including potato and legume-based dishes, pizza, meat imitates, soups, salads, chocolate, pasta, snacks, beer and beer-like beverages, alcoholic drinks, and liqueurs [29].
Acheta domesticus (genus Acheta, family Gryllidae, order Orthoptera, suborder Ensifera) is the most commonly farmed cricket. Over 2400 cricket species have been identified worldwide, with nearly half of them belonging to the Gryllidae family. The Gryllidae family contains 62 popular edible species, the majority of which are found in Asia (41 species) and Africa (26 species), with 5 species found in America, 4 in Europe, and 4 in Australia. AD is the most commonly reared cricket species for human consumption [49]. The use of AD as a novel food has been approved by the EC. EU Regulation 2022/188 approved the commercialization of AD in frozen, dry, and powder form, while EU Regulation 2023/5 approved the marketing of AD in partially defatted powder form. The two regulations’ ratification resulted in a modification of the previously issued EU rule 2017/2470. Despite not being listed in EU 2017/2470, AD has been amended and added to the new food list based on EU 2023/5. AD is considered safe as a food ingredient in crackers, breadsticks, meat imitates, and snacks. AD exhibited no cytotoxicity in three human cell types (HL60, HeLa, and Caco-2). Even though no report on the toxicity and genotoxicity of AD has been published, EFSA has expressed concerns about biological and chemical hazards [50].
Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer, 1797) is a Coleoptera member of the Tenebrionidae family. Its larval form is often called lesser mealworm (LMW). LMW originates from sub-Saharan Africa, but it is diffused worldwide. LMW was so far considered a pest of grains or henneries, as well as a vector for avian pathogens like Salmonella and Escherichia coli [51]. For these reasons, considerable efforts have been dedicated to the search for effective treatments to eradicate this insect. Its reproductive cycle consists of an initial egg stage, followed by 6 to 11 larval instars, a prepupa stage, a pupa stage, and the final adult stage. Its growth is facilitated by humidity and warm conditions, and temperature can reduce the time between instars, and influence the pupal rate and weight [52]. The maximum larval length is 7 to 11 mm during the last instar. Adults can live up to 12 months and lay over 2000 eggs [53,54]. The EFSA panel declared the use of frozen and freeze-dried formulations of LMW whole or in the form of a paste or powder safe. Nevertheless, the panel highlights the potential risk of allergies. The Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2023/58 of 5 January 2023 authorizes the placing of frozen, paste, dried, and powder forms of LMW on the market as a novel food.

3. Nutrient Profile

Insects are an important source of proteins, essential amino acids, fats, minerals, vitamins, and bioactive substances [18,55,56]. Knowledge of nutritive values, health benefits, and safety procedures is essential for promoting edible insects’ consumption.
Table 1 summarizes the proximate composition of the approved edible insects reported by EFSA and the literature [38,43,57,58,59,60,61] fed with standard diets.
According to the reported data, all of the approved insects are mainly composed of proteins. AD has the highest protein content, followed by LMW, TML, and LM. The fat content ranges from 37 to 10% and is high in LM, followed by TML, LMW, and AD. Carbs ranged from 4.62% in crickets to 0.82% in LM, and fibers ranged from 8 in AD to 5.66% in TML.
TML have a high content of proteins and high-quality lipids. Proteins represent the main component of the nutrient composition of TML. However, the quality and value of the protein profile must be assessed through the amino acid content [58]. In addition to the highly valuable protein profile, TML are also interesting as a source of lipids, with an average lipid content of 30–35% of dry weight (Table 1). According to the excellent nutritional profile, it is no surprise that TML have been recommended as a bioregenerative life support system for space missions [41,62]. Fiber content in TML (typically around 5%) is dependent on the different compounds bound to chitin, a key component of edible insects’ exoskeleton [63]. Quantifying crude protein content in insects should consider the high chitin level of a non-protein nitrogen (NPN) polysaccharide found in the exoskeleton of insects, which could overestimate the protein levels [64]. Chitin, a polymer of β-(1–4)-N-acetyl-D-glucosamine, is an undigestible fiber with protective effects on human health such as hypocholesterolemic [65], haemostatic [66,67], and immunomodulatory effects [68]. From a nutritional point of view, TML have a protein content lower than that of beef and chicken, but equal to or higher than that of lamb and pig [69]. Fat content is lower than that of lamb and pork, but it is higher than that of beef and chicken. The FAO and WHO advise a 75 kg man to consume between 2550 and 4000 kcal per day, depending on his basal metabolic rate, to fulfil his energy demands [70]. Athletes need a higher energy intake and a different nutritional consumption level. While proteins can reach up to 2.2 g/kg of body weight, carbohydrates should be raised to a maximum of 12 g/kg of body weight. Due to the higher energy requirements, the suggested fat amount is between 20 and 35 percent of total fat consumption [70,71,72]. Considering those numbers, TML can meet the fat and protein needs of both athletes and the general public, while carbohydrates fall short of the required range often seen for meats [73].
As for TML, LM are noted for their high protein content, with averages around 50 and 60% [74]. Carbohydrates, of which chitin is a part, constitute a low percentage compared to other nutrients varying from 4 to 6%. Fat constitutes the second main component of the LM body. Triglycerides constitute 80% of the insect’s body, while phospholipids are less than 20%. When measured on a dry weight basis, LM have a fat quantity of 13%. Considering other meats, LM have a protein content higher than lamb but comparable to pork and lower than beef and chicken. Fat content is lower than lamb and pork but higher than beef and chicken. If we consider fish, the protein content is lower, but the fat is comparable to salmon and higher than cod, tuna, and rainbow trout [75,76]. Considering the energy requirements, LM have a high energy rate value of 545 kcal/100 g, higher than cod and tuna, but lower than meats. Depending on their nutrition, LM have different nutrient compositions. The insect’s body fat content increased when carrots or wheat bran were added to their diet; however, wheat bran lowered the protein amount [77]. Additionally, carrots did not affect the composition of α and β-carotene concentration; instead, wheat bran decreased carotene concentration. The amount of vitamin A in migratory locusts’ bodies increased when wheat bran and carrots were added to their diet.
Proteins are the most abundant nutrient in crickets. It has been demonstrated that the protein content ranges between 55 and 75% of dry matter. The variation is caused by diets and methodology, most importantly, the conversion factor used in the Kjeldahl assay. AD also had low fat content when compared to other edible insects (10.4% of dry matter), but higher protein (71.7% of dry matter). The fat content of AD matched that of orthoptera species. Among polysaccharides, chitosan was isolated from AD trapped in lipids. The lipid-binding capacity is 168.7–210.8 g oil per g of chitosan, comparable to shrimp chitosan, which exerts antiobesity activity [78]. The protein value is comparable to chicken and higher than lamb, pork, and salmon [75]. Lipid content is about two times higher than in lean fishes like cod and tuna, but lower than in salmon, rainbow trout, and meats. Low fat content makes these crickets appealing to food industries due to their higher shelf-life and applications in sport nutrition.
As for the other insects, LMW are mainly composed of proteins (58–65%), followed by fats (13–29%), carbs (3%), and fibers (6–7%). Notably, the dry matter is lower than the other approved insects, except for AD. The protein content is comparable to TML and higher than lamb and pork. The diet and the conversion factor used for protein determination are the most impactful factors in protein values [64]. As for TML, the fat is higher than beef and fish like cod, tuna, and rainbow trout, but lower than lamb and pork [75]. The energy values are about 460 kcal/100 g DW, a value slightly below those of common meats, but able to satisfy FAO and WHO daily requirements [11,79].
Significant variations are reported between the already published data. Interestingly, the differences about the individual content of macronutrients are mainly related to the diets and to the rearing conditions [80]. The poor comparability of data can be due to the absence of a bromatological analysis of the feeds and to the poorly described rearing conditions, including developmental stage, relative humidity, and temperature [81,82,83].
As reported in Table 2, insects are rich in fats in quantities ranging from 10 to 37% of DM. Regarding FA composition, the most abundant saturated fatty acid is palmitic acid, ranging from 19 to 28%. The most abundant mono and polyunsaturated fatty acids are oleic and linoleic acids. Notably, MUFAs represent the most abundant FA in TML and LMW, while PUFAs are the most abundant FA in AD. Omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids such as α-linolenic and α-linoleic acids are essential PUFAs because humans cannot synthesize them, and therefore must be outsourced from the diet [84]. The n6/n3 ratio is outside the recommended range in TML, AD, and LMW, while it is below 2 in LM [85]. Lowering the ratio between omega-6 and omega-3 (n6/n3 ratio) is important for controlling the risk for inflammation, carcinogenesis, and cardiovascular diseases, with optimal values being around 1–4 [86,87]. Despite the n6/n3 ratio in almost all the insects approved being high due to the abundance of α-linoleic acid, it must be observed that the fatty acid composition of the insects can exhibit great variability and is highly dependent on the insect feed [88]. Specifically, a diet with low contents of omega-3 acids could explain the high n6/n3 ratio. Conversely, it has been reported that a diet supplemented with omega-3 fatty acid sources such as linseed enhances the omega-3 content in TML, thus reducing the n6/n3 ratio to more suitable values [88,89,90]. The nutritional indices associated with cardiovascular pathology prevention are comparable to those of seaweeds, fish, and chicken [91].
As presented in Table 3, the content of amino acids may vary among the literature, depending on the diets, origins, and developmental stage, but also differences in the techniques employed for the determination and the nitrogen-protein conversion factor adopted [43,57]. Nevertheless, the cited studies indicate that insects are both “rich in” protein and an alternative “source of” protein [62]. Noteworthy, insects provide amounts of the required essential amino acids (EAA) close to the values recommended by the FAO [92]. Table 3 highlights that TML possess a high content of Val, Leu, and Lys [40,43,57,58,59,92,93], and can represent a significant source of sulphur-containing amino acids, important for their anticancer, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant properties [94,95,96]. LM has a lower content of sulphur and aromatic amino acids [97,98], but even in this case fulfils all of the EAA suggested by the FAO per gram of protein. Among the unessential amino acids, Gly and Ala are significantly higher with respect to the other insects.
AD have an important content of sulphur amino acids, as well as aromatic amino acids [99]. AD contains all essential amino acids in an amount comparable to those of egg, chicken, pork, and beef, which are considered the primary protein sources in the human diet. Particularly interesting is the high lysine and threonine contents, which could help supplement cereal-based diets, which are generally low in these essential amino acids. Additionally, arginine was found in high concentrations. In humans, arginine is considered an essential amino acid because synthesis is insufficient for growth and development in children. The total quantity of essential amino acids is slightly below the values observed for TML. As observed for TML, LMW fulfil all of the FAO/WHO EAA requirements. Both sulphur and aromatic amino acids are abundant [64,100]. These insects can thus represent a valid alternative for consumers looking for alternatives to conventional meat sources [77,101,102].
As reported in Table 4, numerous micronutrients have been shown to vary significantly between and within species. This probably represents the real variance in micronutrient concentration caused by seasonality, nutrition, and geographic location, especially in wild insects. Variations in the micronutrient makeup of farmed insects may be explained by feed composition. Insects have a valuable mineral composition [40], and TML are no exception [55,103], being rich in minerals like iron, zinc, copper, and magnesium (Table 4), essential for many metabolic and physiological processes [104,105,106,107,108]. In general, the approved insects can fulfill the suggested minerals’ daily requirements. The mineral content of TML is comparable to meats like pork and lamb, and in some cases, higher than seafood products [75,109]. It is undeniable that these insects can improve the micronutrient-poor diets common in developing countries, contributing mostly to iron and zinc deficiencies [40,58].
The contents of some major minerals (Na, Mg, P, K, and Ca) and trace minerals (Mn, Fe, Cu, and Zn) in cricket species differed. The mineral contents of AD were demonstrated to be generally higher than those of other edible crickets. The results revealed that phosphorus was the most abundant, followed by potassium, calcium, magnesium, and sodium. Phosphorus is required for ATP and nucleic acid synthesis (RNA and DNA), as well as protein production. Calcium and magnesium are essential components of bones. The calcium concentration of the crickets was higher than that of milk (90–130 mg/100 g), implying that crickets could be used as an alternative source of calcium. It is worth noting that the synthesis of haemoglobin depends on iron. According to the mineral composition, crickets have the potential to be good sources of dietary minerals [110,111].
Basically, the mineral content of 100 g of dry LM ranges from 8 to 100 mg. In comparison to poultry, beef, and pork, these edible insects possess an equal amount of zinc and a higher ratio of iron measured in mg/100 g dry matter [112]. According to Table 4, LM has calcium levels that are equal to or higher than those of beef and pork, which range from 4 to 28 mg/100 g [75]. It has an equivalent or greater concentration of the essential micronutrients iron and zinc than beef and pork, which had levels of 1–6 and 2.4–12.5 mg/100 g, respectively. As with other meals like fruits and vegetables, the amounts of heavy metals in LM are within recognized limits, and their zinc content is similar to that of beef and pork [75,113].
LMW have a mineral content ranging from 1.9 to 200 mg per 100 g of insect [114]. LMW are abundant in important elements like calcium and iron [76]. The major mineral component is sodium, followed by magnesium, potassium, zinc, iron, and copper. The iron content is higher than in fish like cod, haddock, and shrimp, but comparable to lamb and beef. The content of zinc is higher than in seafood, in particular fish and crustaceans like shrimp and lobster, but slightly below pork and comparable to chicken, lamb, and beef [75,109].

4. Use of Insects as Functional Foods and Sources of Bioactive Compounds

Bioactive compounds are extra nutritional constituents of food present in small quantities that produce positive effects on human health. They generally include PUFAs, peptides, polyphenols, carotenoids, and vitamins [115,116]. Insects are an interesting source of bioactive peptides, lipids, and sterols [56,103,117]. Despite the literature about vitamins being limited, studies have indicated that edible insects are also interesting for their vitamin composition, pointing out that it is highly dependent on the species, the soil, and the feeding diet [23]. By comparing available data, Nowak et al. [55] found that TML can be a good source of vitamin B6 (pyridoxine), B2 (riboflavin), B3 (niacin), B9 (folate), and B12 (cobalamin), as well as vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) [117]. LM also contains retinol, vitamin D, vitamin B12, a variety of carotenoids [118,119], and antioxidant peptides that can guard against conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disease, skin issues, chronic kidney, neurodegenerative disorders, and so forth [120]. Additionally, it was discovered that LM dry matter has antioxidant action against oxidative stress through the capacity to chelate metal ions, with copper ions having the maximum chelating capability [121].
Table 5 offers a schematic overview of the most important bioactive compounds found in approved edible insects and their biological activity. Among bioactive peptides, antihypertensive TML peptides have raised particular interest. Dai et al. [122] were the first to observe an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE)-inhibitory tripeptide, YAN, obtained from TML hydrolysate (IC50 = 172.1 μM), and demonstrated its activity in spontaneously hypertensive rats. Brai et al. identified three other ACE-inhibitory peptides, NIKY (IC50 = 52.2 μM), QGLGY (IC50 = 264 μM), and HILG (IC50 = 2.82 mM), and also investigated their binding mode, providing the in vitro evidence that the antihypertensive activity of TML peptides is probably due to a cumulative effect derived from the presence of several antihypertensive compounds [19]. Several peptides with ACE-inhibitory activity were also found in LM hydrolyzed proteins, among them were TCDSL, IDCSR, and EAEEGQF [120]. Due to their inhibition of ACE, both TML and LM should be included in a standard diet to prevent hypertension and reduce the use of inhibitory drugs. These findings pave the way for the use of EFSA-approved insects as potential ingredients in functional foods intended for blood pressure regulation.
Other peptide fractions comprise compounds implied in blood sugar regulation, and thus may represent a novel strategy for the food-based control of type II diabetes, another important red flag of the metabolic syndrome. Specifically, two important enzymes are α-glucosidase, which hydrolyses complex sugars into digestible monosaccharides in the intestine [151], and DPP IV, implied in the regulation of incretins half-life, important peptides for the regulation of blood sugar level [125,126,127,152].
Zielinska et al. [140] identified two major peptides with α-glucosidase inhibitory activity and showed that heat treatment of the protein hydrolysates not only conserved their effect, but also improved it. Rivero-Pino et al. [141] identified some peptide fractions (from 500 to 1600 Da) with promising DPP IV inhibitory activity, and other fractions (below 500 Da) correlated with α-glucosidase in vitro inhibition. Based on the molecular features, some peptides from TML and AD were suggested to be the bioactive compounds responsible for the described inhibitions (e.g., APVAH for DPP IV inhibition, CSR for α-glucosidase inhibition) [125,126,127,152]. Edible crickets have antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antidiabetic, and antiobesity properties, which enhance the positive effects of their consumption [126,127].
Chen et al. [142] identified two promising peptides endowed with antithrombotic activity and studied their binding mode with molecular modeling techniques, highlighting interaction with thrombin 1 exosite. The cardioprotective activity of TML lipids was further proved in a mouse model.
With the threat of antimicrobial resistance always increasing [153], the discovery of novel antimicrobial agents is of utmost importance. Antibacterial and antifungal properties have also been observed in edible insects’ proteins in different in vitro studies. Tenecin 1 is an inducible protein of the defensin family secreted in TML hemolymph active against Gram-positive bacteria [154]. Tenecin 2 and Tenecin 4 [145] are inducible coleoptericin/diptericin-like and attacin/gloverin-like molecules, respectively, which mainly target Gram-negative bacteria. Tenecin 3 is a constitutive [155] glycine-rich peptide with antifungal activity, provoking the lysis of fungi-infected cells [146].
Chitin is another bioactive compound of edible insects that can be converted into chitosan by deacetylation. This polymer is widely applied in environmental, food, and biomedical areas [115], and recent studies have highlighted its antibacterial and anti-inflammatory properties [129,130,136,137]. In addition, chitosan has important antidiabetic, antihyperlipidemic, and antiobesity properties, as reported in different clinical trials [138,156]. In light of the vast applicability of chitin and chitosan, whose global market increased with an annual growth rate of 15.4% from 2016 to 2023 [157], insects and their exuviae can be an attractive source of these compounds.
Oxidative stress is a pathological condition resulting from an imbalance between the production and removal of ROS and consequent pro-inflammatory molecule generation, resulting in cellular and tissue damage. This is ultimately correlated with metabolic syndrome, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, ageing, cancer, and neurodegenerative processes [158]. Other important compounds with antioxidant activity are polyphenols. Due to insects’ capacity to accumulate compounds from feed, different agricultural, marine, and food industry by-products have been used to increase the antioxidant activity [73,131,132,133,134,159]. The upcycling strategy has multiple advantages: (a) the insects increase the mean weight and speed up their growth; (b) they increase the content of nutraceuticals with antioxidant activity; and (c) they increase the product shelf life.
Adult AD extracted using ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) with absolute ethanol or 50% (v/v) aqueous ethanol exhibited antioxidant activity. The antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects of edible insects are due partly to their MUFA and PUFA content, but also to some peptide hydrolysates [147] that act as iron-chelating agents and 5-LOX/COX-2 inhibitors, as studied in vitro by Zielinska et al. [147].
Furthermore, the ROS-scavenging properties of insects’ peptides make them promising candidates against ROS-induced hepatotoxicity. Research conducted by Cho et al. [148] demonstrated the hepatoprotective effect of TML alkaline hydrolysate and identified two hepatoprotective peptides, AKKHKE and LE. The cytoprotective effect against H2O2-induced toxicity in AML12 mouse cells is due to increases in NF-E2-related factor 2-mediated expression of catalase, heme-oxygenase 1, and glutathione synthesis-related genes [148].
Bioactive lipids comprise the already described MUFAs and PUFAs (Table 2) and tocopherols such as γ-tocopherol [150], all contributing to the aforementioned antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. Among phytosterols, stigmasterol and β-sitosterol were identified, known for their hypocholesterolemic effects [117].
Despite the extraction and recovery of bioactive compounds needing robust studies, the nutraceutical and pharmaceutical potential of insects’ peptides and lipids is evident in both in vitro and animal studies. These findings strongly encourage their use in nutraceutical formulations both as food and feed. It is fundamental to highlight that many endogenous compounds, like large polypeptides and polyphenols, are poorly adsorbed in vivo. In addition, even if the presence of polyphenols facilitates the quenching of ROS, proper storage conditions should be used to maintain their effectiveness and prevent their oxidation before reaching the target.

5. Applications in Plastic Degradation and Circular Economy

Polystyrene (PS) is one of the major sources of plastic products and one of the most persistent environmental pollutants, contributing to ocean microplastics [160]. Biodegradation is one of the hottest topics of environmental research to fight the massive environmental contamination [161], and TML were the first insect larvae capable of degrading petroleum-based plastic polymers [162].
Studies demonstrated that PS undergoes depolymerization within the TML gut, converting ingested PS into CO2 and biomass with a total carbon recovery efficiency above 95%, highlighting the TM capability of degrading PS [162]. Interestingly, the mealworm gut is an effective bioreactor enabling PS biodegradation, due to PS-degrading bacteria [163], similarly to lignocellulose breakdown in ruminant mammals. The ability of TML to digest PS can be defined as ubiquitous and independent from the geographic origin of the mealworms, since it has been described in 22 countries [164], confirming that mealworms from different locations can metabolize PS. Yang et al. further demonstrated TML-based polyethylene (PE) degradation, suggesting a non-specific degradation pattern and how the mealworm gut microbiome can adapt to chemically different plastic polymers [165]. Polystyrene seems to also be metabolized by LMW, thanks to the diversity of intestinal microorganisms [166]. A recent study also highlighted the utilization of polyurethane polymers (PU) by TML [167]. To the best of our knowledge, the safety of the use of plastic-degrading insects for food or feed purposes has not investigated.
Nowadays, the model of a linear economy based on the “take, make, use, and waste” dogma is no longer applicable due to socioeconomic problems, environmental crises, and climate change [168]. Circular economy (CE) [169] is a model of production and consumption based on the restorative industrial system of the “grow-make-use-restore” approach in order to reduce waste to a minimum. It has been previously outlined that insect rearing and entomophagy are very promising from a circular economy standpoint. Furthermore, in addition to their potential as an alternative source of both food and feed, TM are efficient biomass converters [170].
Insects can transform organic waste into nutritious feedstuff by converting organic waste matter to protein, thus contributing significantly to the circular production system [171]. The waste is reintroduced into the food production chain, according to the CE principles [172]. As the farming of insects becomes more popular in Europe and the United States, the use of food industry by-products in insect feed is gaining attention. However, with current production technology, it is still being determined how to maximize the use of by-products in feeds while meeting nutritional needs and preserving successful rearing yields. By-products can be used in insect feeds because many species can feed on an array of plant materials, in place of conventional feed ingredients. Several studies have already demonstrated that by-products from the food industry and agriculture can be used to make suitable feed ingredients for farmed insects [50]. By-products of the agricultural industry enriched in proteins could be used as an alternative to the traditional source of proteins in insect feeds, but they meet the nutritional needs of the insects only as a feed supplement [131,132,133,173,174,175]. Sorjonen et al. assessed the growth performance of the most widely used edible cricket specie, A. domesticus, on 18 experimental diets [176]. The diets included commercial chicken feeds and cricket diets in which soybean was partially or completely replaced with food industry by-products such as potato protein, barley mash, barley feed, compressed leftover turnip rape, and a mix of broad bean and pea on three protein levels. The high- and medium-protein turnip rape and barley mash diets yielded the highest yield and improved all performance variables. Overall, high- and medium-protein diets resulted in the highest yield, growth, and development. Their findings indicated that food industry by-products could be used in cricket feeds, furthering the goals of the circular economy. Protein by-products have significant potential as feed for insects, including AD. Many of these diets promote greater growth, development, and yield when compared to control diets. However, diets primarily composed of organic waste or by-products (low-value diets) may result in lower cricket growth performance and survival. This suggests that diets consisting solely of by-products may be deficient in important, nutritionally necessary components for cricket development and growth. However, their research shows that when other nutritional components, such as carbohydrates and fats, are balanced in the diet, by-products can be used as a protein source for crickets [176].
In this context of “zero-waste”, the frass derived from edible insects is another interesting insect component to exploit and capitalize on [177]. Due to its content of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium (NPK) and its rapid mineralization, it is a valid substitute for conventional NPK mineral fertilizers [178]. Frass of TML, AD, and LM have been investigated as potential fertilizers [179]. The frass is also an excellent material for biochar production, a renewable carbon source involved in wastewater purification of heavy metals [180]. A recent study also investigated the utilization of TM frass-based biochar for CO2 capture technology and supercapacitor materials [181].
Finally, due to their fat content, TM and LMW are studied for their role in biorefinery processes and biodiesel production [182]. Despite more trials and investigations being needed, all these examples demonstrate the enormous potential of edible insects in circular food systems.

6. Market Analysis of Edible Insects

The global market for edible insects has raised considerable interest in recent years due to the high nutritional and protein value of insect-based products, combined with their low sugar and caloric content [56].
Despite skepticism, food neophobia, and the disgust factor still being great hurdles to insect consumption in Western countries [183], the edible insect global market is forecasted to reach USD 9.14 billion by 2034, at a Compounded Average Growth Rate (CAGR) of 28.3% during 2024–2034 [184]. The insects-as-food market is expected to grow faster than the insects-as-feed market, and among the product types (such as whole insects, insect powder, insect meal, and insect oil), insect powder is the product expected to grow at the fastest CAGR in 2024–2034. In the panorama of novel insect foods, TML and AD are considered the main references [184].
Concerning the typology of products traded, the whole insect is the most representative product (50% of the market scene), followed by insect meal (20%). Insect meals differ in their insect content and can be divided into three main categories: products above 90% insect content, products between 10% and 90% content, and products with less than 10% insect content [185]. The latter type is mostly found among protein bars, snacks, and pasta [184], which are specifically designed to attract larger groups of customers without the disadvantage of strong insect visibility, which can trigger phobia and repulsion [186].
According to a study by Orsi et al. [183], sociodemographic factors impact the attitude towards entomophagy, with younger people being more positively interested. In this regard, appealing packaging and attention to the insect-based food’s visual aspects and nutritional content are crucial to attract the target group of customers. Cricket farms and industries in Western countries formulate various types of cricket-based foods in the form of dried cricket and flour, such as cricket bars, to serve Western populations that are unfamiliar with entomophagy [111].
According to a survey from Pippinato et al. [185], the market supply is still managed by a small group of companies, mostly from Northern Europe (Great Britain, Denmark, Finland, and France), with e-commerce being the main distribution channel in Europe. Most companies sell processed raw materials, while only 20% of them (12 out of 59 companies) are also rearing the insects and thus produce their own raw materials.
Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 (EFSA Scientific Committee 2015) now applies to insect-based products as part of the EU’s new regulatory framework on the production and marketing of novel foods. Due to the complexity of this regulation, the placing on the market of novel insect products requires following the EFSA authorization procedure. On one hand, the times related to the authorization are long and may be prohibitive for small and medium enterprises, but on the other hand, they are necessary to guarantee the consumers’ safety. The reduction of the time associated can represent a win-win strategy for both the EU and insect producers. As for the other meals, insect producers are required to follow the hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) rules, which represent another important guarantee for the consumer.
According to a recent IPIFF survey, the safety of the novel products and the nutraceutical compounds of insects should boost customer consumption. For this purpose, some functional qualities of edible insects should be exploited to encourage their consumption. The antioxidant activity is fundamental to preventing age-related pathologies, while chitosan and bioactive peptides, with antihypertensive and antibacterial qualities, are among the most important bioactive substances. Chitosan’s antiobesity action is another significant benefit, especially if combined with some species’ capability to increase the level of satiety [78,85,128].
Novel products like cookies and pasta are emerging, in addition to the energy bars. The use of edible insects added as a powder to well-known dishes is aimed at increasing consumer acceptance and reducing the disgust sensation, which still represents a critical barrier.
TM-based product average prices in the European market are generally linked to the insect quantity, with the highest value for whole insect TM products (22.1 EUR/100 g), followed by insect meals (10.7 EUR/100 g) and the lowest prices for protein bars (2.0 EUR/100 g). Moreover, sales format also plays a role in determining the price, showing that smaller formats have the highest price per 100 g [185].

7. Patents

The growing interest in edible insects is also confirmed by the increasing number of documents and patents published over the years 2010–2024 [115,187]. Table 6 provides an overview of the most relevant patents and patent applications published worldwide since 2010. Regarding the applicants, the majority of applications came from China, followed by Korea, the USA, and EU countries. The majority of patent applications refer to the commercial use of TML, followed by AD, LMW, and LM. Interestingly, the applications cover the use of edible insects as food and feed, including rearing procedures. Due to the presence of many bioactive compounds, several applications are related to the procedure of active component extraction, as well as to the nutraceutical use for pathologies and as cosmetic ingredients. An increasing number of applications are related to the use of insects as plastic degraders.

8. Safety Concerns

Insects reared in accordance with food safety regulations are considered safe to eat. Nevertheless, as for the other foods, they need to be analyzed for the presence of contaminants, including persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, mycotoxins, and pathogenic microorganisms like viruses and bacteria [1,188,189].
The potency of allergens present in insect proteins can vary depending on processing methods. While some studies demonstrated the ineffectiveness of such treatments on the immunoreactivity of insect proteins found in house crickets [190,191], others found that the immunoreactivity of migratory locusts was eliminated when exposed to extreme heat treatments or enzymatic hydrolysis [192]. In addition, the allergenicity can be modified based on the product consumed, due to the presence of many different ingredients.
The mycotoxins of Fusarium, Aspergillus, and Penicillium may also be found in an insect’s gut. This suggests that there may be associated food safety concerns because these toxins may have both acute and long-term impacts on both humans and animals. In addition, different quantities of mycotoxins have also been discovered in approved edible insects [193].
The accumulation of pesticides and dioxins is another possible contamination. Even if some insects like TML could degrade some pesticides like epoxiconazole, further studies are required to test individual persistent organic compounds [194]. On the contrary, Camenzuli demonstrated that heavy metals could accumulate with the insects, based on the concentration of the substance in the feeding substrate, on the individual species, and on the growth stage [193]. Another weakness in the supply chain for edible insects has been found to be the processing of insects, which is common in EU countries, to mask the aspect of insects. Thanks to the heat treatment and drying procedures, the overall number of microorganisms is reduced with respect to the fresh weight [195,196]. Future studies should be dedicated to traceability of insects in processed foods. HPLC and NMR multivariate analyses already offered different tips to better understand the food composition and discriminate between commercial products.

9. Conclusions

Currently, four different edible insects have been approved in Europe for human consumption: Acheta domesticus, Alphitobus diaperinus, Locusta migratoria, and Tenebrio molitor. The growing interest in edible insects is a result of their nutrient composition, as well as their low carbon footprint and simple and affordable breeding process. Insects are rich in digestible proteins, and have a high quantity of MUFA and PUFA, which make them particularly useful for athletes and people under controlled regimens for cardiovascular diseases. Interestingly, several studies highlight that edible insects are rich in bioactive compounds, including peptides with antimicrobial and antifungal activity, formed in the human body during gastrointestinal digestion. Different patent applications are related to the pharmaceutical exploitation of bioactive compounds, which have in many cases complementary activities. Diabetes and hypertension are common comorbidities, which have similar risk factors, including obesity, vascular inflammation, and dyslipidemia. Notably, insects exert antidiabetic properties, inhibiting α-glucosidase and DPP-IV enzymes, but also have an important antihypertensive activity, due to the presence of different inhibitory peptides which inhibit the ACE enzyme. In addition, tocopherols compete with cholesterol for absorption, limiting their plasmatic concentration. Finally, the presence of antioxidants with ROS quenching effects and high-quality FA further promotes the use of insects as functional foods. Taken together, the functional properties of insects are important to prevent and limit cardiovascular diseases, largely diffused in developed countries.
Even if entomophobia is still diffused in Europe, due to the novelty represented by the introduction of novel foods, the market is growing fast with a CAGR of 28.3% during 2024–2034. Future efforts should be addressed to prove their potential as a functional food, and promote their consumption. As demonstrated by the IPIFF survey, consumers are more motivated to eat foods rich in nutraceuticals, due the wellness-associated benefits and the possibility to reduce the development of age-related pathologies. Finally, lessons learned from novel foods like tomatoes in the 1500s and sushi in the early 1900s lead us to believe that their diffusion is just around the corner.

Author Contributions

Writing—original draft, A.B.; Writing—review & editing, C.P., F.P., C.V. and E.D.; Funding acquisition, A.B. and E.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by CARIPT foundation grant Giovani and Ricerca Scientifica 2021 to AB and ED.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
FAOFood and Agriculture Organization
WHOWorld Health Organization
IPIFFInternational Platform of Insects for Food and Feed
EFSAEuropean Food Safety and Authority
TMLTenebrio molitor larvae
LMLocusta migratoria
ADAcheta domesticus
LMWAlphitobius diaperinus
PUFAsPoly unsaturated fatty acids
MUFAsMono unsaturated fatty acids
UFAsUnsaturated fatty acids
EAAsEssential amino acids
NEAANon-essential amino acids
ACEAngiotensine-converting enzyme
ROSReactive oxygen species
DPP IVDipeptidyl-peptidase IV
5-LOX5-lipoxygenase
COX-2Cyclooxygenase-2
MAMealworm alcalase
UAEUltrasound-assisted extraction
PSPolystyrene
PEPolyethylene
CECircular economy
CAGRCompounded average growth rate

References

  1. van HUIS, A.; Arnold van Huis, C. Edible Insects: Challenges and Prospects. Entomol. Res. 2022, 52, 161–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Sogari, G.; Riccioli, F.; Moruzzo, R.; Menozzi, D.; Tzompa Sosa, D.A.; Li, J.; Liu, A.; Mancini, S. Engaging in Entomophagy: The Role of Food Neophobia and Disgust between Insect and Non-Insect Eaters. Food Qual. Prefer. 2023, 104, 104764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Moruzzo, R.; Mancini, S.; Boncinelli, F.; Riccioli, F. Exploring the Acceptance of Entomophagy: A Survey of Italian Consumers. Insects 2021, 12, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. 1% CAGR of Insect Protein Market Predicted to Garner. Available online: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2023/06/28/2696085/0/en/31-1-CAGR-of-Insect-Protein-Market-Predicted-to-Garner-3-751-0-Million-by-2032-Says-Market-us-Research-Study.html (accessed on 13 July 2023).
  5. Europe Edible Insects Market to Reach $2.98 Billion by 2030. Available online: https://www.meticulousresearch.com/pressrelease/795/europe-edible-insects-market-2032 (accessed on 8 April 2025).
  6. Europe Insect Protein Market Size, Share & Growth Drivers by 2031. Available online: https://www.databridgemarketresearch.com/reports/europe-insect-protein-market?srsltid=AfmBOooi8xNdlHAYAMajuUj48Zxs3bxUv4HqyEGSdze2A9JPgaZVDMx8 (accessed on 8 April 2025).
  7. European Union Allows Mealworm Powder in Foods. What’s the Impact? Available online: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sap/2025/02/25/germanys-got-a-bug-in-its-food-and-no-we-are-not-exterminating-it/ (accessed on 8 April 2025).
  8. Guiné, R.P.F.; Florença, S.G.; Costa, C.A.; Correia, P.M.R.; Cruz-Lopes, L.; Esteves, B.; Ferreira, M.; Fragata, A.; Cardoso, A.P.; Campos, S.; et al. Edible Insects: Consumption, Perceptions, Culture and Tradition Among Adult Citizens from 14 Countries. Foods 2024, 13, 3408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nascimento, A.M.; Arruda, A.; Sarinho, A.; Lima, J.; Batista, L.; Dantas, M.F.; Andrade, R.; Lisboa, H.M.; Nascimento, A.; Arruda, A.; et al. Unlocking the Potential of Insect-Based Proteins: Sustainable Solutions for Global Food Security and Nutrition. Foods 2024, 13, 1846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Liang, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Leonard, W.; Fang, Z. Recent Advances in Edible Insect Processing Technologies. Food Res. Int. 2024, 182, 114137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. FAO; IFAD; UNICEF; WFP; WHO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  12. Van Huis, A.; Van Itterbeeck, J.; Klunder, H.; Mertens, E.; Halloran, A.; Muir, G.; Vantomme, P. Edible Insects as a Natural Resource; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Wageningen, U.R., Eds.; Edible Insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Rome, Italy, 2013; ISBN 9789251075968. [Google Scholar]
  13. Malla, N.; Nørgaard, J.V.; Laerke, H.N.; Heckmann, L.-H.L.; Roos, N. Some Insect Species Are Good-Quality Protein Sources for Children and Adults: Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) Determined in Growing Pigs. J. Nutr. 2022, 152, 1042–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kim, S.Y.; Park, J.B.; Lee, Y.B.; Yoon, H.J.; Lee, K.Y.; Kim, N.J. Growth Characteristics of Mealworm Tenebrio molitor. J. Sericultural Entomol. Sci. 2015, 53, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Park, J.B.; Choi, W.H.; Kim, S.H.; Jin, H.J.; Han, Y.S.; Kim, N.J. Developmental Characteristics of Tenebrio molitor Larvae (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) in Different Instars. Int. J. Inustrial Entomol. 2014, 28, 5–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gkinali, A.A.; Matsakidou, A.; Vasileiou, E.; Paraskevopoulou, A. Potentiality of Tenebrio molitor Larva-Based Ingredients for the Food Industry: A Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 119, 495–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; de Boer, I.J.M. Environmental Impact of the Production of Mealworms as a Protein Source for Humans—A Life Cycle Assessment. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e51145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Van Huis, A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 563–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Brai, A.; Trivisani, C.I.; Vagaggini, C.; Stella, R.; Angeletti, R.; Iovenitti, G.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Proteins from Tenebrio molitor: An Interesting Functional Ingredient and a Source of ACE Inhibitory Peptides. Food Chem. 2022, 393, 133409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; van Itterbeeck, J.; Heetkamp, M.J.W.; van den Brand, H.; van Loon, J.J.A.; van Huis, A. An Exploration on Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Production by Insect Species Suitable for Animal or Human Consumption. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e14445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Tanga, C.M.; Egonyu, J.P.; Beesigamukama, D.; Niassy, S.; Emily, K.; Magara, H.J.; Omuse, E.R.; Subramanian, S.; Ekesi, S. Edible Insect Farming as an Emerging and Profitable Enterprise in East Africa. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2021, 48, 64–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Van Dijk, M.; Morley, T.; Rau, M.L.; Saghai, Y. A Meta-Analysis of Projected Global Food Demand and Population at Risk of Hunger for the Period 2010–2050. Nat. Food 2021, 2, 494–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rumpold, B.A.; Schlüter, O.K. Potential and Challenges of Insects as an Innovative Source for Food and Feed Production. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2013, 17, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rumbos, C.I.; Athanassiou, C.G. “Insects as Food and Feed: If You Can’t Beat Them, Eat Them!”—To the Magnificent Seven and Beyond. J. Insect Sci. 2021, 21, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kavle, R.R.; Pritchard, E.T.M.; Bekhit, A.E.D.A.; Carne, A.; Agyei, D. Edible Insects: A Bibliometric Analysis and Current Trends of Published Studies (1953–2021). Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2022, 42, 3335–3355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Evans, J.; Alemu, M.H.; Flore, R.; Frøst, M.B.; Halloran, A.; Jensen, A.B.; Maciel-Vergara, G.; Meyer-Rochow, V.B.; Münke-Svendsen, C.; Olsen, S.B.; et al. “Entomophagy”: An Evolving Terminology in Need of Review. J. Insects Food Feed. 2015, 1, 293–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Insect Food Products International Platform of Insects for Food & Feed (IPIFF) EU CONSUMER ACCEPTANCE SURVEY 2024 European Edible Insects Report by 2 EU Survey on the Consumer Acceptance of Insect Food Products. Available online: https://ipiff.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Report_Survey_Results_12Mar2024.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2025).
  28. Li, M.; Mao, C.; Li, X.; Jiang, L.; Zhang, W.; Li, M.; Liu, H.; Fang, Y.; Liu, S.; Yang, G.; et al. Edible Insects: A New Sustainable Nutritional Resource Worth Promoting. Foods 2023, 12, 4073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Turck, D.; Castenmiller, J.; De Henauw, S.; Hirsch-Ernst, K.I.; Kearney, J.; Maciuk, A.; Mangelsdorf, I.; McArdle, H.J.; Naska, A.; Pelaez, C.; et al. Safety of Frozen and Dried Formulations from Migratory Locust (Locusta Migratoria) as a Novel Food Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA J. 2021, 19, e06667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Turck, D.; Castenmiller, J.; De Henauw, S.; Hirsch-Ernst, K.I.; Kearney, J.; Maciuk, A.; Mangelsdorf, I.; McArdle, H.J.; Naska, A.; Pelaez, C.; et al. Safety of Dried Yellow Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor Larva) as a Novel Food Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA J. 2021, 19, e06343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Turck, D.; Bohn, T.; Castenmiller, J.; De Henauw, S.; Hirsch-Ernst, K.I.; Maciuk, A.; Mangelsdorf, I.; McArdle, H.J.; Naska, A.; Pelaez, C.; et al. Safety of Partially Defatted House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) Powder as a Novel Food Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA J. 2022, 20, e07258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Turck, D.; Bohn, T.; Castenmiller, J.; De Henauw, S.; Hirsch-Ernst, K.I.; Maciuk, A.; Mangelsdorf, I.; McArdle, H.J.; Naska, A.; Pelaez, C.; et al. Safety of Frozen and Freeze-Dried Formulations of the Lesser Mealworm (Alphitobius diaperinus Larva) as a Novel Food Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA J. 2022, 20, e07325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bouchard, P.; Lawrence, J.F.; Davies, A.E.; Newton, A.F. Synoptic Classification of the World Tenebrionidae (Insecta: Coleoptera) with a Review of Family-Group Names. Ann. Zool. 2005, 55, 499–530. [Google Scholar]
  34. Roos, N. Insects and Human Nutrition. In Edible Insects in Sustainable Food Systems; Roos, N., Halloran, A., Vantomme, P., Flore, R., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 83–91. [Google Scholar]
  35. Robinson, W.H. Urban Insects and Aracnids: A Handbook of Urban Entomology; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2005; ISBN 9780521011822. [Google Scholar]
  36. Yu, X.; He, Q.; Wang, D. Dynamic Analysis of Major Components in the Different Developmental Stages of Tenebrio Molitor. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 689746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Selaledi, L.; Mbajiorgu, C.A.; Mabelebele, M. The Use of Yellow Mealworm (T. molitor) as Alternative Source of Protein in Poultry Diets: A Review. Trop. Anim. Health Prod. 2020, 52, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Siemianowska, E.; Kosewska, A.; Aljewicz, M.; Skibniewska, K.A.; Polak-Juszczak, L.; Jarocki, A.; Jędras, M. Larvae of Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) as European Novel Food. Agric. Sci. 2013, 4, 287–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Brai, A.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Pasqualini, C.; Simoni, S.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Tenebrio molitor as a Simple and Cheap Preclinical Pharmacokinetic and Toxicity Model. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 2296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Van Huis, A.; Van Itterbeeck, J.; Klunder, H. Edible Insects: Future Prospects for Food and Feed Security. Food Agric. Organ. United Nations 2013, 97, 693–696. [Google Scholar]
  41. Li, L.; Zhao, Z.; Liu, H. Feasibility of Feeding Yellow Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) in Bioregenerative Life Support Systems as a Source of Animal Protein for Humans. Acta Astronaut. 2013, 92, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Nonaka, K. Feasting on Insects. Entomol. Res. 2009, 39, 304–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Costa, S.; Pedro, S.; Lourenço, H.; Batista, I.; Teixeira, B.; Bandarra, N.M.; Murta, D.; Nunes, R.; Pires, C. Evaluation of Tenebrio molitor Larvae as an Alternative Food Source. NFS J. 2020, 21, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Pino Moreno, J.M.; Ganguly, A. Determination of Fatty Acid Content in Some Edible Insects of Mexico. J. Insects Food Feed. 2016, 2, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. EFSA Scientific Committee. Risk Profile Related to Production and Consumption of Insects as Food and Feed. EFSA J. 2015, 13, 4257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Turck, D.; Bohn, T.; Castenmiller, J.; De Henauw, S.; Hirsch-Ernst, K.I.; Maciuk, A.; Mangelsdorf, I.; McArdle, H.J.; Naska, A.; Pelaez, C.; et al. Safety of Frozen and Dried Formulations from Whole Yellow Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor Larva) as a Novel Food Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA J. 2021, 19, e6778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Locusta Migratoria (Linnaeus, 1758). Available online: https://www.gbif.org/species/1713418 (accessed on 21 July 2023).
  48. Chang, H.; Cassau, S.; Krieger, J.; Guo, X.; Knaden, M.; Kang, L.; Hansson, B.S. A Chemical Defense Deters Cannibalism in Migratory Locusts. Science 2023, 380, 537–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Siddiqui, S.A.; Zhao, T.; Fitriani, A.; Rahmadhia, S.N.; Alirezalu, K.; Fernando, I. Acheta Domesticus (House Cricket) as Human Foods—An Approval of the European Commission—A Systematic Review. Food Front. 2024, 5, 435–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sorjonen, J.M.; Karhapää, M.; Holm, S.; Valtonen, A.; Roininen, H. Performance of the House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) on by-Product Diets in Small-Scale Production. J. Insects Food Feed. 2022, 8, 289–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sammarco, B.C.; Hinkle, N.C.; Crossley, M.S. Biology and Management of Lesser Mealworm Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) in Broiler Houses. J. Integr. Pest. Manag. 2023, 14, 2–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Kim, S.H.I.T.H.G. Effect of Temperature on the Development of Alphitobius diaperinus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Int. J. Indust Entomol. 2017, 35, 106–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. EENY-367/IN662: Lesser Mealworm, Litter Beetle, Alphitobius diaperinus (Panzer) (Insecta: Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Available online: https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN662 (accessed on 13 July 2023).
  54. Rueda, L.M.; Axtell, R.C. Temperature-Dependent Development and Survival of the Lesser Mealworm, Alphitobius diaperinus. Med. Vet. Entomol. 1996, 10, 80–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Nowak, V.; Persijn, D.; Rittenschober, D.; Charrondiere, U.R. Review of Food Composition Data for Edible Insects. Food Chem. 2016, 193, 39–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Errico, S.; Spagnoletta, A.; Verardi, A.; Moliterni, S.; Dimatteo, S.; Sangiorgio, P. Tenebrio molitor as a Source of Interesting Natural Compounds, Their Recovery Processes, Biological Effects, and Safety Aspects. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2022, 21, 148–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Wu, R.A.; Ding, Q.; Yin, L.; Chi, X.; Sun, N.; He, R.; Luo, L.; Ma, H.; Li, Z. Comparison of the Nutritional Value of Mysore Thorn Borer (Anoplophora chinensis) and Mealworm Larva (Tenebrio molitor): Amino Acid, Fatty Acid, and Element Profiles. Food Chem. 2020, 323, 126818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Zielińska, E.; Baraniak, B.; Karaś, M.; Rybczyńska, K.; Jakubczyk, A. Selected Species of Edible Insects as a Source of Nutrient Composition. Food Res. Int. 2015, 77, 460–466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhao, X.; Vázquez-Gutiérrez, J.L.; Johansson, D.P.; Landberg, R.; Langton, M. Yellow Mealworm Protein for Food Purposes—Extraction and Functional Properties. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0147791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Laroche, M.; Perreault, V.; Marciniak, A.; Gravel, A.; Chamberland, J.; Doyen, A. Comparison of Conventional and Sustainable Lipid Extraction Methods for the Production of Oil and Protein Isolate from Edible Insect Meal. Foods 2019, 8, 572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ravzanaadii, N.; Kim, S.-H.; Choi, W.-H.; Hong, S.-J.; Kim, N.-J. Nutritional Value of Mealworm, Tenebrio molitor as Food Source. Int. J. Indust Entomol. 2012, 25, 93–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Grau, T.; Vilcinskas, A.; Joop, G. Sustainable Farming of the Mealworm Tenebrio molitor for the Production of Food and Feed. Z. Fur Naturforschung C 2017, 72, 337–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Adámková, A.; Mlček, J.; Kouřimská, L.; Borkovcová, M.; Bušina, T.; Adámek, M.; Bednářová, M.; Krajsa, J. Nutritional Potential of Selected Insect Species Reared on the Island of Sumatra. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2017, 14, 521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Janssen, R.H.; Vincken, J.P.; Van Den Broek, L.A.M.; Fogliano, V.; Lakemond, C.M.M. Nitrogen-to-Protein Conversion Factors for Three Edible Insects: Tenebrio molitor, Alphitobius diaperinus, and Hermetia illucens. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2017, 65, 2275–2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Ylitalo, R.; Lehtinen, S.; Wuolijoki, E.; Ylitalo, P.; Lehtimäki, T. Cholesterol-Lowering Properties and Safety of Chitosan. Arzneim.-Forsch./Drug Res. 2002, 52, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Nivedhitha, S.; Mony, U.; Jayakumar, R. Chitin and Chitosan as Hemostatic Agents. Encycl. Polym. Sci. Technol. 2016, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Sabab, A.; Liu, S.; Javadiyan, S.; McAdam, C.J.; Hanton, L.R.; Jukes, A.; Vreugde, S.; Wormald, P.J. The Effect of Chemical and Structural Modifiers on the Haemostatic Process and Cytotoxicity of the Beta-Chitin Patch. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 18577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Elieh Ali Komi, D.; Sharma, L.; Dela Cruz, C.S. Chitin and Its Effects on Inflammatory and Immune Responses. Clin. Rev. Allergy Immunol. 2018, 54, 213–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. FoodData Central. Available online: https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-search?query=lamb&type=SR%20Legacy (accessed on 17 September 2024).
  70. Amawi, A.; Alkasasbeh, W.; Jaradat, M.; Almasri, A.; Alobaidi, S.; Hammad, A.A.; Bishtawi, T.; Fataftah, B.; Turk, N.; Al Saoud, H.; et al. Athletes’ Nutritional Demands: A Narrative Review of Nutritional Requirements. Front. Nutr. 2024, 10, 1331854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Pelly, F.E.; Thurecht, R. Evaluation of Athletes’ Food Choices during Competition with Use of Digital Images. Nutrients 2019, 11, 1627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Ibrahim, S.A.; Ayad, A.A.; Williams, L.L.; Ayivi, R.D.; Gyawali, R.; Krastanov, A.; Aljaloud, S.O. Date Fruit: A Review of the Chemical and Nutritional Compounds, Functional Effects and Food Application in Nutrition Bars for Athletes. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 56, 1503–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Brai, A.; Neri, C.; Tarchi, F.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Frosinini, R.; Simoni, S.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Upcycling Milk Industry Byproducts into Tenebrio molitor Larvae: Investigation on Fat, Protein, and Sugar Composition. Foods 2024, 13, 3450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. 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]
  75. Ahmad, R.S.; Imran, A.; Hussain, M.B.; Ahmad, R.S.; Imran, A.; Hussain, M.B. Nutritional Composition of Meat. Meat Sci. Nutr. 2018, 61, 61–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Anzani, C.; Boukid, F.; Drummond, L.; Mullen, A.M.; Álvarez, C. Optimising the Use of Proteins from Rich Meat Co-Products and Non-Meat Alternatives: Nutritional, Technological and Allergenicity Challenges. Food Res. Int. 2020, 137, 109575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Van Der Poel, A.F.B. Effects of Diet on the Chemical Composition of Migratory Locusts (Locusta Migratoria). Zoo. Biol. 2011, 30, 9–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Shagdarova, B.; Konovalova, M.; Varlamov, V.; Svirshchevskaya, E. Anti-Obesity Effects of Chitosan and Its Derivatives. Polymers 2023, 15, 3967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. FAO/WHO Energy and Protein Requirements. Available online: https://www.fao.org/4/aa040e/aa040e00.htm (accessed on 3 December 2024).
  80. Langston, K.; Selaledi, L.; Tanga, C.; Yusuf, A. The Nutritional Profile of the Yellow Mealworm Larvae (Tenebrio molitor) Reared on Four Different Substrates. Future Foods 2024, 9, 100388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kopecká, A.; Kouřimská, L.; Škvorová, P.; Kurečka, M.; Kulma, M. Effect of Temperature on the Nutritional Quality and Growth Parameters of Yellow Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.): A Preliminary Study. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 2610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Lazarević, J.; Milanović, S.; Šešlija Jovanović, D.; Janković-Tomanić, M. Temperature- and Diet-Induced Plasticity of Growth and Digestive Enzymes Activity in Spongy Moth Larvae. Biomolecules 2023, 13, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Yan, G.; Li, D.; Wang, G.; Wu, L. Diet Affects the Temperature–Size Relationship in the Blowfly Aldrichina Grahami. Insects 2024, 15, 246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Kaur, N.; Chugh, V.; Gupta, A.K. Essential Fatty Acids as Functional Components of Foods—A Review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 51, 2289–2303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Gonzalez-Becerra, K.; Barron-Cabrera, E.; Muñoz-Valle, J.F.; Torres-Castillo, N.; Rivera-Valdes, J.J.; Rodriguez-Echevarria, R.; Martinez-Lopez, E. A Balanced Dietary Ratio of N-6:N-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Exerts an Effect on Total Fatty Acid Profile in RBCs and Inflammatory Markers in Subjects with Obesity. Healthcare 2023, 11, 2333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Simopoulos, A.P. The Importance of the Ratio of Omega-6/Omega-3 Essential Fatty Acids. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2002, 56, 365–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Liput, K.P.; Lepczyński, A.; Ogłuszka, M.; Nawrocka, A.; Poławska, E.; Grzesiak, A.; Ślaska, B.; Pareek, C.S.; Czarnik, U.; Pierzchała, M. Effects of Dietary n–3 and n–6 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids in Inflammation and Cancerogenesis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 6965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Dreassi, E.; Cito, A.; Zanfini, A.; Materozzi, L.; Botta, M.; Francardi, V. Dietary Fatty Acids Influence the Growth and Fatty Acid Composition of the Yellow Mealworm Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Lipids 2017, 52, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Francardi, V.; Cito, A.; Fusi, S.; Botta, M.; Dreassi, E. Linseed to Increase N-3 Fatty Acids in Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera Tenebrionidae). Redia 2017, 100, 73–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Lawal, K.G.; Kavle, R.R.; Akanbi, T.O.; Mirosa, M.; Agyei, D. Enrichment in Specific Fatty Acids Profile of Tenebrio molitor and Hermetia Illucens Larvae through Feeding. Future Foods 2021, 3, 100016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chen, J.; Liu, H. Nutritional Indices for Assessing Fatty Acids: A Mini-Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 5695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. FAO/WHO. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition. FAO Food Nutr. Pap. 2013, 92, 1–66.
  93. Jiang, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Zheng, Y.; Liu, Z.; Zhong, Y.; Deng, Y.; Zhao, Y. Effects of Salting-in/out-Assisted Extractions on Structural, Physicochemical and Functional Properties of Tenebrio molitor Larvae Protein Isolates. Food Chem. 2021, 338, 128158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Townsend, D.M.; Tew, K.D.; Tapiero, H. Sulfur Containing Amino Acids and Human Disease. Biomed. Pharmacother. 2004, 58, 47–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Kim, J.H.; Jang, H.J.; Cho, W.Y.; Yeon, S.J.; Lee, C.H. In Vitro Antioxidant Actions of Sulfur-Containing Amino Acids. Arab. J. Chem. 2020, 13, 1678–1684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Colovic, M.; Vasic, V.; Djuric, D.; Krstic, D. Sulphur-Containing Amino Acids: Protective Role Against Free Radicals and Heavy Metals. Curr. Med. Chem. 2018, 25, 324–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Finke, M.D. Nutritional Value of Insects and Ways to Manipulate Their Composition. J. Insects Food Feed. 2020, 7, 639–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Perez-Santaescolastica, C.; de Pril, I.; van de Voorde, I.; Fraeye, I. Fatty Acid and Amino Acid Profiles of Seven Edible Insects: Focus on Lipid Class Composition and Protein Conversion Factors. Foods 2023, 12, 4090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Fombong, F.T.; Kinyuru, J.; Ng’ang’a, J.; Ayieko, M.; Tanga, C.M.; Broeck, J.V.; Van Der Borght, M. Affordable Processing of Edible Orthopterans Provides a Highly Nutritive Source of Food Ingredients. Foods 2021, 10, 144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Rumbos, C.I.; Karapanagiotidis, I.T.; Mente, E.; Athanassiou, C.G. The Lesser Mealworm Alphitobius diaperinus: A Noxious Pest or a Promising Nutrient Source? Rev. Aquac. 2019, 11, 1418–1437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Mohamed, E.H.A. Determination of Nutritive Value of Edible Migratory Locust Locusta migratoria, Linnaeus, 1758 (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Int. J. Adv. Pharm. Biol. Chem. 2011, 30, 9–16. [Google Scholar]
  102. Osimani, A.; Garofalo, C.; Milanović, V.; Taccari, M.; Cardinali, F.; Aquilanti, L.; Pasquini, M.; Mozzon, M.; Raffaelli, N.; Ruschioni, S.; et al. Insight into the Proximate Composition and Microbial Diversity of Edible Insects Marketed in the European Union. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2017, 243, 1157–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Zielińska, E.; Karaś, M.; Jakubczyk, A.; Zieliński, D.; Baraniak, B. Edible Insects as Source of Proteins; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; ISBN 9783319545288. [Google Scholar]
  104. Abbaspour, N.; Hurrell, R.; Kelishadi, R. Review on Iron and Its Importance for Human Health. J. Res. Med. Sci. 2014, 19, 164–174. [Google Scholar]
  105. Roohani, N.; Hurrell, R.; Kelishadi, R.; Schulin, R. Zinc and Its Importance for Human Health: An Integrative Review. J. Res. Med. Sci. 2013, 18, 144–157. [Google Scholar]
  106. Ruiz, L.M.; Libedinsky, A.; Elorza, A.A. Role of Copper on Mitochondrial Function and Metabolism. Front. Mol. Biosci. 2021, 8, 711227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Schwalfenberg, G.K.; Genuis, S.J. The Importance of Magnesium in Clinical Healthcare. Scientifica 2017, 2017, 4179326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. World Health Organization. Vitamin and Mineral Requirements in Human Nutrition, 2nd ed.; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  109. Jayasekara, C.; Mendis, E.; Kim, S.K. Seafood in the Human Diet for Better Nutrition and Health. In Encyclopedia of Marine Biotechnology; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 2939–2959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Udomsil, N.; Imsoonthornruksa, S.; Gosalawit, C.; Ketudat-Cairns, M. Nutritional Values and Functional Properties of House Cricket (Acheta domesticus) and Field Cricket (Gryllus bimaculatus). Food Sci. Technol. Res. 2019, 25, 597–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Kemsawasd, V.; Inthachat, W.; Suttisansanee, U.; Temviriyanukul, P. Road to The Red Carpet of Edible Crickets through Integration into the Human Food Chain with Biofunctions and Sustainability: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 1801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Egonyu, J.P.; Subramanian, S.; Tanga, C.M.; Dubois, T.; Ekesi, S.; Kelemu, S. Global Overview of Locusts as Food, Feed and Other Uses. Glob. Food Sec 2021, 31, 100574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Poma, G.; Cuykx, M.; Amato, E.; Calaprice, C.; Focant, J.F.; Covaci, A. Evaluation of Hazardous Chemicals in Edible Insects and Insect-Based Food Intended for Human Consumption. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2017, 100, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Janssen, R.H.; Canelli, G.; Sanders, M.G.; Bakx, E.J.; Lakemond, C.M.M.; Fogliano, V.; Vincken, J.P. Iron-Polyphenol Complexes Cause Blackening upon Grinding Hermetia illucens (Black Soldier Fly) Larvae. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 2967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Cláudia da Costa Rocha, A.; José de Andrade, C.; de Oliveira, D. Perspective on Integrated Biorefinery for Valorization of Biomass from the Edible Insect Tenebrio Molitor. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 116, 480–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Kris-Etherton, P.M.; Hecker, K.D.; Bonanome, A.; Coval, S.M.; Binkoski, A.E.; Hilpert, K.F.; Griel, A.E.; Etherton, T.D. Bioactive Compounds in Foods: Their Role in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer. Am. J. Med. 2002, 113, 71–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Mlček, J.; Adámková, A.; Adámek, M.; Borkovcová, M.; Bednářová, M.; Knížková, I. Fat from Tenebrionidae Bugs—Sterols Content, Fatty Acid Profiles, and Cardiovascular Risk Indexes. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2019, 69, 247–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Harrison, E.H.; Kopec, R.E. Digestion and Intestinal Absorption of Dietary Carotenoids and Vitamin A. In Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract, 6th ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; Volume 2, pp. 1133–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Zielińska, E.; Karaś, M.; Jakubczyk, A. Antioxidant Activity of Predigested Protein Obtained from a Range of Farmed Edible Insects. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 52, 306–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Teixeira, C.S.S.; Biltes, R.; Villa, C.; Sousa, S.F.; Costa, J.; Ferreira, I.M.P.L.V.O.; Mafra, I. Exploiting Locusta migratoria as a Source of Bioactive Peptides with Anti-Fibrosis Properties Using an in Silico Approach. Food Funct. 2024, 15, 493–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Salama, S.M. Nutrient Composition and Bioactive Components of the Migratory Locust (Locusta migratoria). In African Edible Insects As Alternative Source of Food, Oil, Protein and Bioactive Components; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 231–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Dai, C.; Ma, H.; Luo, L.; Yin, X. Angiotensin I-Converting Enzyme (ACE) Inhibitory Peptide Derived from Tenebrio molitor (L.) Larva Protein Hydrolysate. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2013, 236, 681–689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Messina, C.M.; Gaglio, R.; Morghese, M.; Tolone, M.; Arena, R.; Moschetti, G.; Santulli, A.; Francesca, N.; Settanni, L. Microbiological Profile and Bioactive Properties of Insect Powders Used in Food and Feed Formulations. Foods 2019, 8, 400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Sousa, P.; Borges, S.; Pintado, M. Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Insect Alphitobius diaperinus towards the Development of Bioactive Peptide Hydrolysates. Food Funct. 2020, 11, 3539–3548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Hall, F.; Johnson, P.E.; Liceaga, A. Effect of Enzymatic Hydrolysis on Bioactive Properties and Allergenicity of Cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus) Protein. Food Chem. 2018, 262, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Hall, F.; Reddivari, L.; Liceaga, A.M. Identification and Characterization of Edible Cricket Peptides on Hypertensive and Glycemic In Vitro Inhibition and Their Anti-Inflammatory Activity on RAW 264.7 Macrophage Cells. Nutrients 2020, 12, 3588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Nongonierma, A.B.; Lamoureux, C.; FitzGerald, R.J. Generation of Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV (DPP-IV) Inhibitory Peptides during the Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Tropical Banded Cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus) Proteins. Food Funct. 2018, 9, 407–416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  128. Seo, M.; Goo, T.W.; Chung, M.Y.; Baek, M.; Hwang, J.S.; Kim, M.A.; Yun, E.Y. Tenebrio molitor Larvae Inhibit Adipogenesis through AMPK and MAPKs Signaling in 3T3-L1 Adipocytes and Obesity in High-Fat Diet-Induced Obese Mice. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Navarro del Hierro, J.; Gutiérrez-Docio, A.; Otero, P.; Reglero, G.; Martin, D. Characterization, Antioxidant Activity, and Inhibitory Effect on Pancreatic Lipase of Extracts from the Edible Insects Acheta domesticus and Tenebrio molitor. Food Chem. 2020, 309, 125742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Gessner, D.K.; Schwarz, A.; Meyer, S.; Wen, G.; Most, E.; Zorn, H.; Ringseis, R.; Eder, K. Insect Meal as Alternative Protein Source Exerts Pronounced Lipid-Lowering Effects in Hyperlipidemic Obese Zucker Rats. J. Nutr. 2019, 149, 566–577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Brai, A.; Vagaggini, C.; Pasqualini, C.; Poggialini, F.; Tarchi, F.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Use of Distillery By-Products as Tenebrio molitor Mealworm Feed Supplement. J. Insects Food Feed. 2023, 9, 611–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Brai, A.; Provenzani, M.P.; Pasqualini, C.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Tarchi, F.; Frosinini, R.; Francardi, V.; Simoni, S.; Dreassi, E. Exploiting Fall Foliage By-Products to Optimize Tenebrio molitor Nutraceutical Value. J. Insects Food Feed. 2023, 93, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Brai, A.; Poggialini, F.; Trivisani, C.I.; Vagaggini, C.; Tarchi, F.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Efficient Use of Agricultural Waste to Naturally Fortify Tenebrio molitor Mealworms and Evaluation of Their Nutraceutical Properties. J. Insects Food Feed. 2023, 9, 599–610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Brai, A.; Tarchi, F.; Pasqualini, C.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Frosinini, R.; Simoni, S.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. The Replacement of Flour-Based Feed with Pellets Reduces Dustiness and Improves Tenebrio molitor Breeders’ Safety. Redia 2023, 106, 133–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Tzeng, H.P.; Liu, S.H.; Chiang, M.T. Antidiabetic Properties of Chitosan and Its Derivatives. Mar. Drugs 2022, 20, 784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Demirok Soncu, E.; Özdemir, N.; Arslan, B.; Küçükkaya, S.; Soyer, A. Contribution of Surface Application of Chitosan–Thyme and Chitosan–Rosemary Essential Oils to the Volatile Composition, Microbial Profile, and Physicochemical and Sensory Quality of Dry-Fermented Sausages during Storage. Meat Sci. 2020, 166, 108127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Ren, J.; Li, Q.; Dong, F.; Feng, Y.; Guo, Z. Phenolic Antioxidants-Functionalized Quaternized Chitosan: Synthesis and Antioxidant Properties. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2013, 53, 77–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Pan, H.; Yang, Q.; Huang, G.; Ding, C.; Cao, P.; Huang, L.; Xiao, T.; Guo, J.; Su, Z. Hypolipidemic Effects of Chitosan and Its Derivatives in Hyperlipidemic Rats Induced by a High-Fat Diet. Food Nutr. Res. 2016, 60, 31137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Odjo, K.; Al-Maqtari, Q.A.; Yu, H.; Xie, Y.; Guo, Y.; Li, M.; Du, Y.; Liu, K.; Chen, Y.; Yao, W. Preparation and Characterization of Chitosan-Based Antimicrobial Films Containing Encapsulated Lemon Essential Oil by Ionic Gelation and Cranberry Juice. Food Chem. 2022, 397, 133781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Zielińska, E.; Karaś, M.; Baraniak, B.; Jakubczyk, A. Evaluation of ACE, α-Glucosidase, and Lipase Inhibitory Activities of Peptides Obtained by in Vitro Digestion of Selected Species of Edible Insects. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2020, 246, 1361–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rivero-Pino, F.; Guadix, A.; Guadix, E.M. Identification of Novel Dipeptidyl Peptidase IV and α-Glucosidase Inhibitory Peptides FromTenebrio Molitor. Food Funct. 2021, 12, 873–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Chen, F.; Jiang, H.; Lu, Y.; Chen, W.; Huang, G. Identification and in Silico Analysis of Antithrombotic Peptides from the Enzymatic Hydrolysates of Tenebrio molitor Larvae. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2019, 245, 2687–2695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Moon, H.J.; Lee, S.Y.; Kurata, S.; Natori, S.; Lee, B.L.; Dong, J.J.; Ku, K.J. Purification Antibacterial Molitorl and Molecular Protein from Cloning Larvae of CDNA for an Inducible of the Coleopteran, Tenebrio molitor. J. Biochem. 1994, 116, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Roh, K.B.; Kim, C.H.; Lee, H.; Kwon, H.M.; Park, J.W.; Ryu, J.H.; Kurokawa, K.; Ha, N.C.; Lee, W.J.; Lemaitre, B.; et al. Proteolytic Cascade for the Activation of the Insect Toll Pathway Induced by the Fungal Cell Wall Component. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 19474–19481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Chae, J.H.; Kurokawa, K.; So, Y.I.; Hwang, H.O.; Kim, M.S.; Park, J.W.; Jo, Y.H.; Lee, Y.S.; Lee, B.L. Purification and Characterization of Tenecin 4, a New Anti-Gram-Negative Bacterial Peptide, from the Beetle Tenebrio molitor. Dev. Comp. Immunol. 2012, 36, 540–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Jung, Y.H.; Park, B.Y.; Lee, D.-K.; Hahn, Y.; Chung, J.H.; Han, D.M.; Moon, H.J.; Lee, B.L.; Lee, Y. Biochemical and Molecular Characterization of an Antifungal Protein from Tenebrio molitor Larvae. Mol. Cells 1995, 5, 287–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Zielińska, E.; Baraniak, B.; Karaś, M. Identification of Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Peptides Obtained by Simulated Gastrointestinal Digestion of Three Edible Insects Species (Gryllodes sigillatus, Tenebrio molitor, Schistocerca gragaria). Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 53, 2542–2551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Cho, H.R.; Lee, S.O. Novel Hepatoprotective Peptides Derived from Protein Hydrolysates of Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor). Food Res. Int. 2020, 133, 109194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Lee, J.; Lee, H.I.; Lee, M.K. Physicochemical Properties of Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor Larva) Oil and Its Hypolipidemic Effect as a Replacement for Dietary Saturated Fat in Mice. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2022, 124, 2100213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Jeon, Y.H.; Son, Y.J.; Kim, S.H.; Yun, E.Y.; Kang, H.J.; Hwang, I.K. Physicochemical Properties and Oxidative Stabilities of Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) Oils under Different Roasting Conditions. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2016, 25, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  151. Derosa, G.; Maffioli, P. α-Glucosidase Inhibitors and Their Use in Clinical Practice. Arch. Med. Sci. 2012, 8, 899–906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Capuano, A.; Sportiello, L.; Maiorino, M.I.; Rossi, F.; Giugliano, D.; Esposito, K. Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes Therapy—Focus on Alogliptin. Drug Des. Devel Ther. 2013, 7, 989–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Chinemerem Nwobodo, D.; Ugwu, M.C.; Oliseloke Anie, C.; Al-Ouqaili, M.T.S.; Chinedu Ikem, J.; Victor Chigozie, U.; Saki, M. Antibiotic Resistance: The Challenges and Some Emerging Strategies for Tackling a Global Menace. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2022, 36, e24655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Lee, K.H.; Hong, S.Y.; Oh, J.E. Synthesis and Structure-Function Study about Tenecin 1, an Antibacterial Protein from Larvae of Tenebrio Molitor. FEBS Lett. 1998, 439, 41–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Lee, Y.J.; Chung, T.J.; Park, C.W.; Hahn, Y.; Chung, J.H.; Lee, B.L.; Han, D.M.; Jung, Y.H.; Kim, S.; Lee, Y. Structure and Expression of the Tenecin 3 Gene in Tenebrio molitor. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1996, 218, 6–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Huang, H.; Zou, Y.; Chi, H.; Liao, D. Lipid-Modifying Effects of Chitosan Supplementation in Humans: A Pooled Analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2018, 62, e1700842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Jardine, A.; Sayed, S. Valorisation of Chitinous Biomass for Antimicrobial Applications. Pure Appl. Chem. 2018, 90, 293–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Sharifi-Rad, M.; Anil Kumar, N.V.; Zucca, P.; Varoni, E.M.; Dini, L.; Panzarini, E.; Rajkovic, J.; Tsouh Fokou, P.V.; Azzini, E.; Peluso, I.; et al. Lifestyle, Oxidative Stress, and Antioxidants: Back and Forth in the Pathophysiology of Chronic Diseases. Front. Physiol. 2020, 11, 694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Brai, A.; Brogi, E.; Tarchi, F.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Simoni, S.; Francardi, V.; Dreassi, E. Exploitation of the Nutraceutical Potential of the Infesting Seaweed Chaetomorpha linum as a Yellow Mealworms’ Feed: Focus on Nutrients and Antioxidant Activity. Foods 2025, 14, 325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  160. Wu, W.M.; Yang, J.; Criddle, C.S. Microplastics Pollution and Reduction Strategies. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2017, 11, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Bahl, S.; Dolma, J.; Singh, J.J.; Sehgal, S. Biodegradation of Plastics: A State of the Art Review. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 39, 31–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Yang, Y.; Yang, J.; Wu, W.M.; Zhao, J.; Song, Y.; Gao, L.; Yang, R.; Jiang, L. Biodegradation and Mineralization of Polystyrene by Plastic-Eating Mealworms: Part 1. Chemical and Physical Characterization and Isotopic Tests. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 12080–12086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Yang, Y.; Yang, J.; Wu, W.M.; Zhao, J.; Song, Y.; Gao, L.; Yang, R.; Jiang, L. Biodegradation and Mineralization of Polystyrene by Plastic-Eating Mealworms: Part 2. Role of Gut Microorganisms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 12087–12093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  164. Yang, S.S.; Wu, W.M.; Brandon, A.M.; Fan, H.Q.; Receveur, J.P.; Li, Y.; Wang, Z.Y.; Fan, R.; McClellan, R.L.; Gao, S.H.; et al. Ubiquity of Polystyrene Digestion and Biodegradation within Yellow Mealworms, Larvae of Tenebrio molitor Linnaeus (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Chemosphere 2018, 212, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  165. Brandon, A.M.; Gao, S.H.; Tian, R.; Ning, D.; Yang, S.S.; Zhou, J.; Wu, W.M.; Criddle, C.S. Biodegradation of Polyethylene and Plastic Mixtures in Mealworms (Larvae of Tenebrio molitor) and Effects on the Gut Microbiome. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 6526–6533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Cucini, C.; Leo, C.; Vitale, M.; Frati, F.; Carapelli, A.; Nardi, F. Bacterial and Fungal Diversity in the Gut of Polystyrene-Fed Alphitobius diaperinus (Insecta: Coleoptera). Animal Gene 2020, 17–18, 200109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Bulak, P.; Proc, K.; Pytlak, A.; Puszka, A.; Gawdzik, B.; Bieganowski, A. Biodegradation of Different Types of Plastics by Tenebrio molitor Insect. Polymers 2021, 13, 3508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Haas, W.; Krausmann, F.; Wiedenhofer, D.; Heinz, M. How Circular Is the Global Economy?: An Assessment of Material Flows, Waste Production, and Recycling in the European Union and the World in 2005. J. Ind. Ecol. 2015, 19, 765–777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Kirchherr, J.; Reike, D.; Hekkert, M. Conceptualizing the Circular Economy: An Analysis of 114 Definitions. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2017, 127, 221–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Derler, H.; Lienhard, A.; Berner, S.; Grasser, M.; Posch, A.; Rehorska, R. Use Them for What They Are Good at: Mealworms in Circular Food Systems. Insects 2021, 12, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Moruzzo, R.; Riccioli, F.; Diaz, S.E.; Secci, C.; Poli, G.; Mancinni, S. Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor): Potential and Challenges to Promote Circular Economy. Animals 2021, 11, 2568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. 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]
  173. Baldacchino, F.; Spagnoletta, A.; Lamaj, F.; Vitale, M.L.; Verrastro, V. First Optimization of Tomato Pomace in Diets for Tenebrio molitor (L.) (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Insects 2023, 14, 854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Yakti, W.; Förster, N.; Müller, M.; Mewis, I.; Ulrichs, C. Hemp Waste as a Substrate for Hermetia illucens (L.) (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) and Tenebrio molitor L. (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) Rearing. Insects 2023, 14, 183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Ferri, I.; Dell’Anno, M.; Spano, M.; Canala, B.; Petrali, B.; Dametti, M.; Magnaghi, S.; Rossi, L. Characterisation of Tenebrio molitor Reared on Substrates Supplemented with Chestnut Shell. Insects 2024, 15, 512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Sorjonen, J.M.; Valtonen, A.; Hirvisalo, E.; Karhapää, M.; Lehtovaara, V.J.; Lindgren, J.; Marnila, P.; Mooney, P.; Mäki, M.; Siljander-Rasi, H.; et al. The Plant-Based by-Product Diets for the Mass-Rearing of Acheta domesticus and Gryllus Bimaculatus. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0218830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Beesigamukama, D.; Subramanian, S.; Tanga, C.M. Nutrient Quality and Maturity Status of Frass Fertilizer from Nine Edible Insects. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 7182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Houben, D.; Daoulas, G.; Faucon, M.P.; Dulaurent, A.M. Potential Use of Mealworm Frass as a Fertilizer: Impact on Crop Growth and Soil Properties. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 4659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Safitri, R.A.; Vandeweyer, D.; Deruytter, D.; Meijer, N.; Coudron, C.L.; Banach, J.L.; van der Fels-Klerx, H.J. Exploring Potential Uses of Insect Frass for Agricultural Production Considering Its Nutrients, and Chemical and Microbiological Safety. J. Insects Food Feed. 2024, 1, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Yang, S.S.; Chen, Y.D.; Kang, J.H.; Xie, T.R.; He, L.; Xing, D.F.; Ren, N.Q.; Ho, S.H.; Wu, W.M. Generation of High-Efficient Biochar for Dye Adsorption Using Frass of Yellow Mealworms (Larvae of Tenebrio molitor Linnaeus)Fed with Wheat Straw for Insect Biomass Production. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 227, 33–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Wang, S.; Shi, Y.; Xiang, H.; Liu, R.; Su, L.; Zhang, L.; Ji, R. Functional Utilization of Biochar Derived from Tenebrio molitor Feces for CO2 Capture and Supercapacitor Applications. RSC Adv. 2022, 12, 22760–22769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Zheng, L.; Hou, Y.; Li, W.; Yang, S.; Li, Q.; Yu, Z. Exploring the Potential of Grease from Yellow Mealworm Beetle (Tenebrio molitor) as a Novel Biodiesel Feedstock. Appl. Energy 2013, 101, 618–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Orsi, L.; Voege, L.L.; Stranieri, S. Eating Edible Insects as Sustainable Food? Exploring the Determinants of Consumer Acceptance in Germany. Food Res. Int. 2019, 125, 108573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Meticulous Research Edible Insects Market Size, Share & Trends Analysis to 2033. Available online: https://www.meticulousresearch.com/product/edible-insects-market-5156 (accessed on 21 November 2024).
  185. Pippinato, L.; Gasco, L.; Di Vita, G.; Mancuso, T. Current Scenario in the European Edible-Insect Industry: A Preliminary Study. J. Insects Food Feed. 2020, 6, 371–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Collins, C.M.; Vaskou, P.; Kountouris, Y. Insect Food Products in the Western World: Assessing the Potential of a New “Green” Market. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2019, 112, 518–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Baiano, A. Edible Insects: An Overview on Nutritional Characteristics, Safety, Farming, Production Technologies, Regulatory Framework, and Socio-Economic and Ethical Implications. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 100, 35–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. de Boer, A.; Bast, A. Demanding Safe Foods—Safety Testing under the Novel Food Regulation (2015/2283). Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 72, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Ververis, E.; Ackerl, R.; Azzollini, D.; Colombo, P.A.; de Sesmaisons, A.; Dumas, C.; Fernandez-Dumont, A.; Ferreira da Costa, L.; Germini, A.; Goumperis, T.; et al. Novel Foods in the European Union: Scientific Requirements and Challenges of the Risk Assessment Process by the European Food Safety Authority. Food Res. Int. 2020, 137, 109515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Leni, G.; Tedeschi, T.; Faccini, A.; Pratesi, F.; Folli, C.; Puxeddu, I.; Migliorini, P.; Gianotten, N.; Jacobs, J.; Depraetere, S.; et al. Shotgun Proteomics, in-Silico Evaluation and Immunoblotting Assays for Allergenicity Assessment of Lesser Mealworm, Black Soldier Fly and Their Protein Hydrolysates. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  191. De Marchi, L.; Mainente, F.; Leonardi, M.; Scheurer, S.; Wangorsch, A.; Mahler, V.; Pilolli, R.; Sorio, D.; Zoccatelli, G. Allergenicity Assessment of the Edible Cricket Acheta domesticus in Terms of Thermal and Gastrointestinal Processing and IgE Cross-Reactivity with Shrimp. Food Chem. 2021, 359, 129878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  192. Pali-Schöll, I.; Meinlschmidt, P.; Larenas-Linnemann, D.; Purschke, B.; Hofstetter, G.; Rodríguez-Monroy, F.A.; Einhorn, L.; Mothes-Luksch, N.; Jensen-Jarolim, E.; Jäger, H. Edible Insects: Cross-Recognition of IgE from Crustacean- and House Dust Mite Allergic Patients, and Reduction of Allergenicity by Food Processing. World Allergy Organ. J. 2019, 12, 100006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  193. Camenzuli, L.; van Dam, R.; de Rijk, T.; Andriessen, R.; van Schelt, J.; van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.I. Tolerance and Excretion of the Mycotoxins Aflatoxin B1, Zearalenone, Deoxynivalenol, and Ochratoxin A by Alphitobius diaperinus and Hermetia illucens from Contaminated Substrates. Toxins 2018, 10, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Lv, X.; Liu, C.; Li, Y.; Gao, Y.; Guo, B.; Wang, H.; Li, J. Bioaccumulation and Excretion of Enantiomers of Myclobutanil in Tenebrio molitor Larvae Through Dietary Exposure. Chirality 2013, 25, 890–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Vandeweyer, D.; Wynants, E.; Crauwels, S.; Verreth, C.; Viaene, N.; Claes, J.; Lievens, B.; Van Campenhout, L. Microbial Dynamics during Industrial Rearing, Processing, and Storage of Tropical House Crickets (Gryllodes sigillatus) for Human Consumption. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 84, e00255-18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Klunder, H.C.; Wolkers-Rooijackers, J.; Korpela, J.M.; Nout, M.J.R. Microbiological Aspects of Processing and Storage of Edible Insects. Food Control 2012, 26, 628–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Analysis of the proximate composition of edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in g per 100 g of insect #.
Table 1. Analysis of the proximate composition of edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in g per 100 g of insect #.
Crude Protein FatTotal Digestible Carbs Dietary Fiber Ash Moisture Chitin
MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDMeanSDMeanSDMeanSDMeanSD
LMW frozen17.714.078.210.810.820.221.420.161.110.0469.301.43NrNr
LM frozen13.901.2811.280.820.220.042.580.080.780.1171.500.001.770.02
LMW paste15.914.666.060.69NrNr2.220.280.920.0672.301.372.200.19
AD powder64.3526.9510.381.364.621.088.840.665.000.564.821.256.261.64
LMW powder55.6014.9323.881.582.650.466.860.383.530.102.761.15NrNr
LM powder51.777.9935.632.492.080.317.020.481.900.001.380.5811.720.69
LM dried46.824.2837.982.730.820.048.700.262.620.414.280.086.500.07
LMW dried53.9315.7425.271.59NrNr6.540.373.590.092.370.387.840.62
TML dried53.3712.3926.284.183.582.965.661.184.000.272.582.006.420.28
# Results comprehend edible insects in selected forms approved by EFSA [29,30,31,32]. Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobius diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML). Nr: not reported.
Table 2. Analysis of the fatty acids and nutritional indices associated with cardiovascular pathologies in edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in g per 100 g of total fatty acids #.
Table 2. Analysis of the fatty acids and nutritional indices associated with cardiovascular pathologies in edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in g per 100 g of total fatty acids #.
FATMLLMADLMW
C14:03.571.67TrTr
C16:018.6228.4424.2624.29
C16:11.32TrTrTr
C18:05.338.279.198.7
C18:135.6331.623.337.16
C18:228.2316.9636.6722.57
C18:3n − 31.1810.472.55Tr
C24:11.08TrTrTr
SFA31.1739.2135.1836.41
MUFA38.4233.0225.0639.21
PUFA30.4127.7739.7624.38
PUFA/SFA0.980.711.130.67
n−31.4910.672.751.15
n−628.7716.9737.0123.09
n−6/n−319.431.5913.4720.16
IA0.480.580.410.44
IT0.720.670.860.98
H/H2.941.962.542.44
# Results of edible insects approved by EFSA [73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80]. Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobus diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML). Tr: values < 0.4; SFA: saturated fatty acid; MUFA: monounsaturated fatty acid; PUFA: polyunsaturated fatty acid.
Table 3. Analysis of amino acids in EFSA-approved edible insects. Results are reported in g per 100 g of proteins # [98].
Table 3. Analysis of amino acids in EFSA-approved edible insects. Results are reported in g per 100 g of proteins # [98].
Amino AcidTMLLMADLMWFAO/WHO (2013) Standard [92]
Met1.52–1.750.07–1.421.50–2.21.59–1.711.6
Cys + cys1-10–1.150.87–4.400.85–1.460.84–0.96
Total sulphur AA2.92.293.652.56
Tyr5.80–8.115.14–5.644.74–6.266.16–8.493.8
Phe3.64–4.393.23–3.892.20–4.074.22–5.17
Total aromatic AA12.498.8710.3310.38
Ile4.94–4.994.61–4.663.60–4.464.61–4.773
Leu7.88–8.338.35–8.446.31–7.797.32–7.365.9
Lys5.2–6.145.01–5.725.2–5.807.057.354.5
Thr4.28–4.523.82–3.963.1–4.074.31–4.422.3
Val6.42–7.136.46–7.15.20–6.595.76–6.43.9
His3.552.72–2.872.92–3.393.21–3.971.5
Total EAA48.3743.0645.0146.44
Ser5.03–5.054.07–4.083.71–5.364.41–4.66
Arg5.57–5.945.91–6.25.73–7.785.35–5.91
Gly4.98–5.966.89–7.344.53–6.174.20–5.02
Asp7.88–9.217.21–8.157.10–10.309.38–9.47
Glu11.49–12.3011.28–12.259.80–11.013.02–13.43
Ala7.40–7.6512.29–12.736.57–9.176.58–7.95
Pro7.66–7.967.64–8.095.16–6.526.36–7.13
Total NEAA51.6356.9454.9953.56
# Results of edible insects approved by EFSA. Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobus diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML). EAA: essential amino acid. NEAA: non-essential amino acid.
Table 4. Analysis of the mineral content in edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in mg per 100 g of insect #.
Table 4. Analysis of the mineral content in edible insects reared on standard diets. Results are reported in mg per 100 g of insect #.
Copper Iron Magnesium Manganese Potassium Sodium Zinc
AD 0.51–4.861.93–11.2322.60–136.580.89–4.40347–1211.10101.44–471.46.71–22.20
LM 0.5–3.682.9–4.434.6–54.20.338–2.9101.3–46693.4–173.03.7–17.4
LMW 1.9–2.15.05–5.35115–1300.54–0.58100–260200–22710–14
TML1.6–2.04.6–6.7191.6–2020.70–1.89726–926.8188.4–2066.70–12.66
Recommended daily intake (mg/day) a1200–15007.5–58.8220–2601.6–2.64700–51001200–15003–14
# Results of edible insects approved by EFSA. Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobus diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML). a Data from FAO, WHO, and the Linus Pauling Institute.
Table 5. Bioactive compounds, activity, and mechanisms found in edible insects #.
Table 5. Bioactive compounds, activity, and mechanisms found in edible insects #.
Bioactive CompoundActivityMechanismReferences
Protein hydrolysatesAntioxidantROS quenching[123,124]
Antidiabeticα-glucosidase and DPP-IV inhibition[125,126,127]
AntiobesityAMPK MAPKs signalling[128]
AntihypertensiveACE inhibition[19,124]
AntilipidemicInhibition of pancreatic lipase[129,130]
AntimicrobialVarious[123]
OilAntioxidantROS quenching[19,129]
PolyphenolsAntioxidantROS quenching[73,131,132,133,134]
ChitosanAntiobesityFlocculant properties[78]
AntidiabeticEnzymatic inhibition[135]
AntioxidantROS quenching[129,130,136,137]
HypolipidemicLipid binding[138]
Antimicrobialvarious[139]
Bioactive peptides
TCDSL [120]
IDCSR
EAEEGQF
YANAntihypertensiveACE inhibition[122]
NICKY [19]
QGLGY
HILG
NYVADGLG α-glucosidase inhibition
AAAPVAVAK [140]
AR [141]
CSRAntidiabetic
APVAA DPP IV inhibition[141]
AAGAPP
SLVDAIGMGP AGFAGDDAPR AntithromboticInteraction with thrombin 1 exosite[142]
Tenecin 1AntimicrobialGram-positive bacteria[143]
Tenecin 2Gram-negative bacteria[144]
Tenecin 4[145]
Tenecin 3Fungi[146]
FDPFPK VAPEEHPVAntioxidant and anti-inflammatory5-LOX and COX-2 inhibition[147]
MA hydrolysateAKKHKELEHepatoprotectiveReduction of ROS in hepatocytes and upregulation of expression of antioxidant genes[148]
Bioactive lipids
MUFAs and PUFAsCardioprotectiveAntioxidant, anti-inflammatory[88]
[149]
γ-tocopherolAntioxidantReduction of ROS and lipid peroxidation[150]
PhytosterolsHypocholesterolemicReduction of intestinal absorption of cholesterol[117]
# Results of edible insects approved by EFSA. Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobus diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML). ACE: angiotensin-converting enzyme I, DPP IV: dipeptidyl-peptidase IV, 5-LOX: 5-lipoxygenase, COX-2: cyclooxygenase-2, MA: mealworm alcalase, ROS: reactive oxygen species.
Table 6. Patents and patent applications related to edible insects #.
Table 6. Patents and patent applications related to edible insects #.
Patent SubjectTitlePublication NumberPublication Date
RearingMethod capable of prolonging Tenebrio molitor larvae breeding timeCN106719456A31 May 2017
Breeding method capable of accelerating growth of larvae of Tenebrio molitorCN106577555A26 April 2017
Special compound feed for adult Tenebrio molitorCN110934225A31 March 2020
Tenebrio molitor breeding equipment and Tenebrio molitor breeding methodCN114287392A8 April 2022
Cleaning equipment for Tenebrio molitor breeding equipmentCN216369171U26 April 2022
Tenebrio molitor breeding and conveying device in sterile environment and using method of deviceCN112918995A8 June 2021
Efficient feeding method for Tenebrio molitor of reproductionCN109197787A15 January 2019
Breeding method of Tenebrio molitorCN108849760A23 November 2018
Ventilation equipment for breeding Tenebrio molitorCN217791081U15 November 2022
Breeding method for selenium-rich Tenebrio molitorCN108541665A18 September 2018
Tenebrio molitor breeding and conveying device in sterile environment and using method of deviceCN112918995A8 June 2021
Method and facility for breeding insectsUS11712027B21 August 2023
dsRNA as insect control agentUS9528123B227 December 2016
Migratory locust rhythm genes clk, cyc, and per and application thereof in regulation and control of diapause of insectsCN108610426B15 May 2018
Migratory locust V-ATPase-V1 structural domain gene and application of dsRNA thereof in pest controlCN111394371B10 July 2020
Extraction of insect componentsPreparation method of Tenebrio molitor protein powder CN110934221A 31 March 2020
Tenebrio molitor protein extraction processCN113563411A29 October 2021
Method for extracting Tenebrio molitor protein through superfine grinding-ultrasonic wave-microwave couplingCN113372409A10 September 2021
Tenebrio molitor flavone and ultrasonic-assisted extraction method thereofCN108114002A5 June 2018
Extraction method of Tenebrio molitor chitosanCN113667036A19 November 2021
Production of insect-based productsProduction method of Tenebrio molitor oilCN110938485A31 March 2020
Low-temperature production process of dry Tenebrio molitor powderCN115254353A1 November 2022
Tenebrio molitor pupa oil microcapsule preparation methodCN106579449A26 April 2017
Preparation method of Tenebrio molitor powder rich in antibacterial peptideCN115251236A1 November 2022
Preparation process for protein peptide of Tenebrio molitorCN105385736A9 March 2016
Insect ApplicationsFermented mycoplasm prepared from cordyceps militaris fermented Tenebrio molitor and application thereof in preparation of agent for improving immunityWO2020098397A122 May 2020
Method for comprehensively utilizing Tenebrio molitorCN108753433A6 November 2018
Method for repairing petroleum-contaminated soilCN115415309A2 December 2022
Tenebrio molitor dung biochar as well as preparation method and application thereofCN113860303A31 December 2021
A composition for recovery after surgical comprising extracts of Tenebrio molitorKR20190131315A26 November 2019
Composition for preventing, improving, or treating sarcopenia, comprising Tenebrio molitor larval protein or hydrolysate thereof as active ingredientUS20230149475A118 May 2023
Applications of insects’ bioactive compoundsMethod for inducing Tenebrio molitor to produce antibacterial peptide, preparation method of Tenebrio antibacterial peptide, and application of Tenebrio molitor antibacterial peptideCN114097711A1 March 2022
Composition for Prevention or Treatment of Obesity Comprising Tenebrio molitor larva extract or Tenebrio molitor larva suspensionKR101651907B112 September 2016
Gene for antifreeze protein derived from Tenebrio molitor, recombinant expression vector, engineering strain, and application of geneCN110616227A27 December 2019
High-protein blood-sugar-reducing Tenebrio molitor biscuit and preparation method thereofCN114847321A5 August 2022
Composition for Prevention or Treatment diabetes comprising Tenebrio molitor larva or extract suspension of Tenebrio molitor larvaKR101651908B130 August 2016
Food composition comprising of extracts of cricket having protective effects against hepatotoxicityKR100599460B16 January 2006
Preventive and therapeutic compositions for skin inflammation comprising cricket extractsKR20130134097A10 December 2013
Anticoagulant composition for inhibiting thrombin activity and food composition comprising extract of cricket fraction as effective componentKR101747245B14 May 2017
Composition for preventing improving or treating thrombosis comprising extract of fermented Tenebrio molitor as effective componentKR102048309B125 November 2019
Polymer degradationTenebrio molitor phagostimulant and method for degrading plastic by using Tenebrio molitorCN113854413A31 December 2021
Method for degrading waste PVC plastic film by Tenebrio molitorCN115152707A11 October 2022
Microorganism isolated from Tenebrio molitor larva and having plastic degrading activity, and method for degrading plastic using sameWO2018143750A19 August 2018
Breeding method of Tenebrio molitor capable of degrading plasticCN108713530A30 October 2018
Method for rapidly degrading and cleanly utilizing waste polylactic acid by utilizing Tenebrio molitor larvaeCN113040096A 29 June 2021
TransportationTenebrio molitor larva living body vacuum dust-free transportation methodCN106614406A10 May 2017
Tenebrio molitor transporting and packaging structure with high survival rateCN218704941U24 March 2023
Insect-based foodTenebrio molitor food and preparation method thereofCN104041723A17 September 2014
Processing method of Tenebrio molitor foodCN115777923A14 March 2023
Production method of Tenebrio molitor soy sauceCN110934283A31 March 2020
Formula of pet chocolate containing Tenebrio molitor powder and processing technology thereofCN113841789A 28 December 2021
Tenebrio molitor coarse grain breadCN104824103A12 August 2015
High-protein blood-sugar-reducing Tenebrio molitor biscuit and preparation method thereofCN114847321A5 August 2022
Yellow mealworm-chive oil cookies and preparation method thereofCN111345337A30 June 2020
Breeding method for crickets comprising ginsenoside type saponin and polysaccharide from panax ginseng and their extracts and food compositionKR101716763B123 November 2016
Method for preparing cricket product for food and cricket product for food prepared therefromKR101661176B125 May 2016
Cookie and cake with insectsCN106720118A 31 May 2017
Insect-based feedMethod for supplementing Tenebrio molitor proteins to improve muscle quality of broiler chickensCN109007322A18 December 2018
Method for preparing cricket product for food and cricket product for food prepared therefromKR101661176B12 May 2016
Pet cat and dog food containing Tenebrio molitor larva zymolyte and preparation method thereofCN112042824A8 December 2020
FeedProduction method of high-protein Tenebrio molitor feedCN114081017A 25 February 2022
Tenebrio molitor adult feedCN104814352A5 August 2015
Method for preparing Tenebrio molitor feed by utilizing rotten vegetable leavesCN113785921A14 December 2021
Tenebrio molitor breeding feed based on crop waste and preparation method of Tenebrio molitor breeding feedCN114176179A15 March 2022
Tenebrio molitor amino acid feed and preparation method thereofCN107242382A13 October 2017
Method of producing Tenebrio molitor feed with kitchen wastes and straws, and product and apparatusCN106173567A7 December 2016
Tenebrio molitor larva feed containing Chinese herbal medicines and preparation method thereofCN114711348A 8 July 2022
Degreased Tenebrio molitor protein feed and preparation method thereofCN113678943A23 November 2021
Tenebrio molitor protein feed rich in various trace elements and preparation method of defatted Tenebrio molitor protein feedCN111990535A 27 November 2020
ScreeningTenebrio molitor size and excrement classifying and screening deviceCN218460097U10 February 2023
Screening device for separating Tenebrio molitor pupae, larvae, and fecesCN208879055U21 May 2019
CosmeticsCosmetic or pharmaceutical composition for promoting hair growth comprising Tenebrio molitor fractionsKR101897720B112 September 2018
Cosmetic compositions for antioxidation skin whitening or anti-inflammation comprising Tenebrio molitor extracts as an active ingredientKR20180006699A19 January 2018
Composition containing Gryllus bimaculatus extract as active ingredient for improving skin wrinkles or moisturizing skinWO2019022478A231 January 2019
Cosmetic composition for skin cell regenerationKR101720293B128 March 2017
Crickets for improved antioxidant and antiaging activity, skin beauty, and cosmetic composition comprising the sameKR101809451B116 August 2016
Skin external application composition for promoting wound healing or cosmetic composition for improving wrinkle comprising oil of Tenebrio molitor mealwormKR20190011054A 1 February 2019
# Results comprehend edible insects approved by EFSA up to December 2024, and include Acheta domesticus (AD); Alphitobus diaperinus (LMW); Locusta migratoria (LM); and Tenebrio molitor larvae (TML).
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

Brai, A.; Pasqualini, C.; Poggialini, F.; Vagaggini, C.; Dreassi, E. Insects as Source of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant, Antihypertensive, and Antidiabetic Properties: Focus on the Species Approved in Europe up to 2024. Foods 2025, 14, 1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081383

AMA Style

Brai A, Pasqualini C, Poggialini F, Vagaggini C, Dreassi E. Insects as Source of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant, Antihypertensive, and Antidiabetic Properties: Focus on the Species Approved in Europe up to 2024. Foods. 2025; 14(8):1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081383

Chicago/Turabian Style

Brai, Annalaura, Claudia Pasqualini, Federica Poggialini, Chiara Vagaggini, and Elena Dreassi. 2025. "Insects as Source of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant, Antihypertensive, and Antidiabetic Properties: Focus on the Species Approved in Europe up to 2024" Foods 14, no. 8: 1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081383

APA Style

Brai, A., Pasqualini, C., Poggialini, F., Vagaggini, C., & Dreassi, E. (2025). Insects as Source of Nutraceuticals with Antioxidant, Antihypertensive, and Antidiabetic Properties: Focus on the Species Approved in Europe up to 2024. Foods, 14(8), 1383. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081383

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