Preprint
Review

This version is not peer-reviewed.

Edible Insects in Perspective of Sustainability – a Review on Hazards and Benefits

A peer-reviewed version of this preprint was published in:
Foods 2025, 14(8), 1382. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14081382

Submitted:

01 April 2025

Posted:

01 April 2025

You are already at the latest version

Abstract
The increasing global population, projected to exceed 9,1 billion by 2050, presents a critical challenge in sustainable food production. Edible insects have emerged as a promising alternative protein source due to their high nutritional value, low environmental footprint and efficient resource utilization. This review explores the opportunities and challenges of integrating edible insects into food systems. Benefits include their high protein content and quality, low greenhouse gas emissions, low-cost production and ability to thrive on organic waste. Furthermore, edible insect cultivation requires significantly less land and water compared to traditional livestock. Edible insects are nutritionally rich, containing substantial amount of essential amino acids, unsaturated fatty acids and minerals. However, barriers to widespread adoption persist, such as cultural perceptions, regulatory hurdles, potential allergenicity, biological and chemical contamination. Furthermore, standardizing rearing practices and ensuring food safety are critical for broader adoption. While edible insects represent a nutritious, low-cost food and feed, there are a lot of variables that have not been fully investigated. Only after further research, promising results and relatively easy to apply solutions, edible insects might be considered a sustainable food source. Considering 2050 challenges more intensive research is highly advised.
Keywords: 
;  ;  ;  ;  

1. Introduction

It is anticipated that the human population will continue to steadily grow, reaching over 9.1 billion by 2050, according to the FAO report [1]. Although some sources predict population reaching almost 11 billion people [2]. This will pose a tremendous challenge for every aspect of human life, however, the critical issue will be the ability to feed the global population and provide sufficient amount of drinking water [3,4]. Therefore, in recent years an increased attention has been given to production methods, that align with sustainable development principles.
Production of sufficient quantity of food, with adequate nutritional value, while maintaining safety standards throughout the products’ life cycles, may prove to be exceptionally difficult. Severe hunger problem has been a worldwide challenge for centuries, especially in developing countries, which already constitute to the majority of human population. The discrepancy in population growth between developing and developed countries is expected to grow intensively [2,5]. Consequently, the hunger problem may increase, further intensifying the need for increased food production. It is crucial to remember, that food production, along with other aspects of human living, cannot proceed at the expense of the environment. Therefore, human environmental impact has been continuously studied for years. It is considered, that livestock production is one of the main sources greenhouse gas emission. The need to feed and breed livestock might also be a major factor responsible for deforestation and extremely high demand for water consumption [6]. Considering the above, search for an alternative, sustainable food source is absolutely crucial to human kind. In order to diminish the livestock production, a source of an alternative, high quality protein source is demanded. This is the reason for the increase of interest in edible insects [7].

3. Challenges of Popularizing Edible Insects

When considering the benefits of insect production and consumption, it is impossible to overlook the associated risks. Insect consumption encounters consumer reluctance, insufficient comprehensive research on microbiological safety and impact on the human health, chemical safety during production and processing, as well as potential fraud throughout the supply chain. The information is also scarce in the aspect of certain environmental threats. In the context of risks and challenges that may arise from the production and consumption of insects, several areas can be distinguished: awareness and cultural aspects, technical and technological aspects, health safety for humans and animals, as well as environmental safety, primarily focused on the natural environment, and labeling, understood as ensuring informational safety of the product.

3.1. Consumer-Based Challenges

Disgust and the perception of insects as pests are the most common reasons for rejecting them. Food neophobia plays a key role in shaping the acceptance of edible insects by Western societies [49]. Research indicates that neophobic attitudes are more frequently exhibited by individuals who prefer meat. However, if insects were served in a different form, such as flour added to baked goods, acceptance of such a product increased [50].

3.2. Non consumer-Based Challenges

3.2.1. Inedible Insect Parts

One of the factors limiting the consumption of insects is the presence of sharp spines on insect legs. Mlcek et al. report that as early as 1945, Bouvier observed in the Democratic Republic of Congo that consuming whole locusts and grasshoppers could lead to intestinal problems caused by the spines on the insects’ legs. Autopsies of monkeys that died during locust invasions also revealed that consuming locusts resulted in their death due to the same reason [51].
One of the reasons that may limit the consumption of insects is the presence of antinutritional compounds. Among these, chitin is the most often mentioned due to its potentially adverse effect on protein digestion [52] and being considered indigestible itself. Although, the latter finding might not be entirely true as there has been reports of human chitinases - chitotriosidase 1 (CHIT1) and acid mammalian chitinase (AMCase) along with several chitinase-like proteins (CLPs). However, their role has been mostly investigated in relation to their protective role against pathogens through chitin degradation, mammalian chitinases are now gaining attention as the key players in innate immune response against fungi, bacteria, and other pathogens [53]. Additionally, recently discovered chitinolytic enzymes produced by bacteria in the human gastrointestinal tract suggest that chitin and chitosan may be digestible [33]. Research by Refael et al. (2022) suggests that insect-derived chitin could potentially be a new prebiotic, though further studies are needed to confirm this concept [54].
Chitin and chitosan, possess significant potential, which can be utilized in food and nutrition as well as in the pharmaceutical, cosmetic and dietary supplement industries [55]. These compounds may have a wide range of biomedical applications, including wound healing, tissue engineering, drug delivery and antimicrobial therapies. Their antimicrobial properties open up possibilities for innovative solutions in various medical interventions [56]. Chitosans have also been successfully implemented in food packaging for years (Tripathi Chitosan films). Waste generated from the farming and processing edible insects should be collected and considered as an alternative source of chitin/chitosan [57]. Properly prepared insects do not pose a threat to consumers.

3.2.2. Antinutrients and Allergenicity

Other antinutritional compounds present in insects include tannins, phytates, oxalates, and cyanogenic glycosides. These compounds disrupt mineral balance and chelate proteins, with oxalates additionally impairing kidney function [58,59]. A particular case of an antinutritional effect is the enzyme thiaminase, which is responsible for seasonal ataxia observed after consuming roasted larvae of Anaphe venata by the population of Nigeria [60].
Another concern raised by the scientific community is the allergenicity of insects. Certain types of proteins present in edible insects, including arginine kinase, are considered allergens [61]. Insects are closely related to crustaceans, which suggests, that they might trigger food allergies [62] Cases described in the literature do not confirm widespread allergic reactions among insect consumers. However, insects should be consumed cautiously, especially when being introduced into the diet for the first time. Further research is needed to assess the risks associated with food allergies to edible insects [63]. Furthermore, according to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2470 of 20 December 2017, which establishes the Union list of novel foods under Regulation (EU) 2015/2283 of the European Parliament and Council on novel foods, food products containing edible insects must include a statement indicating, that this ingredient may cause allergic reactions in consumers with known allergies to crustaceans, mollusks, and related products, as well as to mites.
At this point, it is worth revisiting the previously discussed risk associated with insects, namely chitin. While chitin is not widely regarded as a potential allergen, it can cause sensitization through frequent exposure [64]. This risk could affect, for example, workers on insect farms. Such allergies have been reported previously by Schroeckenstein et al. (1990), who noted that beetles from the Tenebrionid family are potentially significant allergens for workers exposed to grains or grain products [65].

3.2.3. Biological Risks

Among biological risks, pathogenic microorganisms and parasites are highlighted. Pathogenic bacteria such as Escherichia, Staphylococcus, and Bacillus can infect both humans and insects [61]. Edible insects serve as hosts for potentially dangerous bacterial species, including Campylobacter, Bacillus, Staphylococcus, Neisseria, Pseudomonas, and Clostridium. These insects can contribute to foodborne diseases. Having considered collecting insects from natural environments in developing countries, primarily in Africa and Asia, ensuring food safety will be particularly challenging [60,66].
Entomophagy can facilitate the transmission of parasites from insects to humans. Dicrocoelium dendriticum is a zoonotic parasite that can be easily transmitted to humans through the consumption of edible insects, such as ants. Parasites like Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, and Toxoplasma spp. have been isolated from cockroaches [67]. For this reason, consuming raw insects is not recommended, and they should undergo appropriate processing. Common methods for preserving insects include reducing water content (drying, freeze-drying), acidification, or thermal processing (boiling, blanching, or sterilization) [68].

3.2.4. Chemical Risks

Chemical contamination in insects includes pesticides, heavy metals, and mycotoxins. Pesticide residues pose a particular risk for insects collected from the wild. Collectors often lack awareness or disregard whether the agricultural fields where insects are found have been treated with pesticides. The literature provides limited data on pesticide residues in insects, primarily concerning Asian countries [69]. The Codex Alimentarius recommends that the concentrations of chlorpyrifos and piperonyl butoxide in insect feed, such as alfalfa and field peas, be lower than the permissible levels for livestock feed, specifically 5,000 μg/kg and 2,000 μg/kg, respectively [70].
Heavy metals such as cadmium, lead, mercury, and arsenic accumulate in insects, with the extent of accumulation depending on the specific metal, insect species and its growth stage [71]. EFSA reports that heavy metals like cadmium and arsenic can accumulate in edible insects when they are fed contaminated feed or inhabit polluted substrates [70]. However, research by Poma et al. (2017) conducted in Belgium found that insects and products derived from them, contained fewer metal contaminants than other commonly consumed animal products. This is particularly true for farmed insects, as insect farms allow for proper monitoring and control [72].
Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by various phytopathogenic molds, including species of Fusarium, Aspergillus, and Penicillium. They are significant food contaminants with acute and chronic adverse effects on human health. Mycotoxins may originate from contaminated feed or substrates used for rearing edible insects [67,73].
EFSA (2015) highlights that other chemical substances may be used during insect farming, such as biocides for cleaning facilities and equipment or veterinary drugs for treating certain diseases [70]. Moreover, some insect species naturally produce toxins (venoms). Furthermore, EU regulations state, that a minimum 24 hour fasting period is required to allow the larvae and adult forms to discard their bowel content before killing and processing the insects [74]. We do not know the hazards, if 24-hour fasting period was not applied.

3.2.5. Functional Properties of Edible Insect Proteins

Edible insect proteins are deemed to be an animal protein alternative. To properly evaluate its potential to be utilized as such, functional properties have to be thoroughly investigated. There are several factors that should be taken into consideration: solubility, foaming and emulsification.
High solubility can be an indicator, that protein is highly digestible, which makes it a desirable treat for protein application [75]. Studies report, that some edible insects have the lowest solubility at pH 4-5 and highest at 10-11 for protein preparations obtained via combined alkaline extraction and isoelectric precipitation [31,76,77]. However, it solubility differs depending on the processing. The use of a fluidized bed, microwave, and rack oven for drying yellow mealworms reduced protein solubility to just 12.65-19.25%, in contrast to freeze-dried (40.65%), vacuum-dried (49.70%), and fresh (53.24%) mealworms [78,79].
Yi et al. investigated the foaming and gelling properties of proteins extracted from five insect species: Tenebrio molitor, Zophobas morio, Alphitobius diaperinus, Acheta domesticus, and Blaptica dubia. Their performance was compared to that of chicken egg white albumin. At pH levels 3, 5, 7, and 10, the insect proteins exhibited significantly poorer results than albumin. Moreover, when foams were produced, they were found to be unstable [80].
Edible insect proteins exhibit significant gelling properties, which are valuable for food applications such as jellies, desserts, yogurts, and meat products. The ability of these proteins to form gel structures depends on factors such as pH, temperature, protein concentration, and the presence of salts [6]. Research has shown that proteins extracted from various insect species, such as Tenebrio molitor and Acheta domesticus, gel within a pH range of 7–10 at high protein concentrations (approximately 30% w/v). The gelation temperature for Tenebrio molitor proteins was found to be around 61.7 °C, while for Acheta domesticus, it was approximately 56.2 °C [6,80].
External factors, including salt addition (e.g., NaCl), pH alterations, and controlled thermal treatments, significantly influence the gelation process. Higher protein concentrations and specific thermal conditions promote the transition from sol to gel, resulting in the formation of a three-dimensional network. These properties are also influenced by the protein profile, which varies depending on the life stage of the insects. Proteins extracted from adult insects generally exhibit stronger gel-forming abilities compared to those from larvae. Such differences are attributed to intrinsic structural characteristics of the proteins that determine their functionality [6,81].
These findings highlight the potential of insect proteins as gelling agents, offering a sustainable and functional alternative to conventional ingredients in food formulations.

3.2.6. Insect Population Worldwide

In the research on the impact of insects on the environment and the influence of the environment on insects, two main directions can be observed. The first focuses on the declining number of insects worldwide, while the second highlights the risks associated with industrial insect farming, including the potential release of insects into the environment due to various factors. Van Huis and Oonincx (2017) emphasize the threats to aquatic insect populations caused by water pollution, the disappearance of caterpillar species in Africa due to excessive deforestation, which destroys their habitats, and the decline of edible insect species regarded as pests and eradicated in agroecosystems [15].

4. Discussion

Popularizing edible insects is proposed as one of the solutions for feeding growing human population. Having estimated global population by the year 2050, production of sufficient food quantity and adequate quality while being crucial will become extremely challenging. It will be even more demanding in developing countries, as their population growth will be the most dynamic.
In the context of risks associated with insect farming and its impact on the environment, the challenge lies in the fact that conventional food production systems are governed by established legal regulations, whereas knowledge and regulations applicable to commercial insect farming remain fragmented [82]. Consequently, numerous challenges must be addressed during the development of the edible insect market. These challenges pertain to policy formulation, legislative solutions, production and control standardization, as well as potential certification of mass-produced edible insects. Welfare standards for each species of farmed insect are essential. Additionally, logistical operations cannot be effectively executed without the implementation of appropriate regulations and procedures. At present, edible insects fall outside the scope of veterinary regulations that ensure the safety of animal production within the European Union [82].
Another issue requiring research is the concern over potential adulteration of products containing insects, whether whole, ground or in the form of isolated proteins. Food fraud is a global problem of increasing significance that can harm both human and animal health. The globalization of food supply chains offers many benefits in terms of food variety and availability, but can also increase the risk of fraud. The lack of regulations and standards regarding the authenticity of insects and insect-derived products will hinder efforts to combat illegal activities within supply chains [83].

5. Conclusions

The main advantages of insect farming include: lower land and water requirements, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, high feed conversion efficiency (i.e., weight gain relative to feed intake) and the ability to transform low-value organic by-products into high-quality food or feed.
Benefits of utilizing insects as food and feed is undeniable, although there are numerous challenges. Additionally, the continuous decline in insect populations receives limited attention across various domains, from scientific research to policymaking and conservation efforts. Scientists have urgently called for prioritizing insect conservation. It also highlights, that global treaty on pollinator care and the restoration of pollination ecosystems is urgently needed [84].
There are numerous researches and reports referring to many benefits of utilizing edible insects as a sustainable food source. Rearing edible insects is much more efficient than livestock production, especially when considering greenhouse gas emission, feed conversion ratio, area needed for production and general low cost of production. Additionally, edible insects might be considered as a method to convert organic waste to high quality proteins.
Current EU regulations admit only 4 species of insects to be used as food. Additionally, there are only certain forms and stages of development allowed to be utilized. It highlights how problematic and time-consuming adaptation can be. Despite the slow pace of adoption, neophobia and general disgust towards insects are still relevant and will probably remain relevant for years to come. There is also one additional condition, that is opposed to sustainable development. Should humanity decide to farm only few species on mass scale, it will most definitely stand against biodiversity.
Having considered the aforementioned arguments it would be highly advisable to revisit global stand on edible insects as a sustainable food source. There are still too many variables that have not been fully investigated. While edible insects are definitely nutritious and relatively easy to produce, each species and stage of development might be significantly different. Therefore, it is essential to conduct further researches on edible insects, to collect needed data.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, F.K. and M.Ś..; formal analysis, F.K.; investigation, F.K and M.Ś; resources, F.K, M.Ś and M.S.; writing— original draft preparation, F.K and M.S; writing—review and editing, M.S.; visualization, F.K and M.Ś.; supervision, F.K. and M.S; All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. How to feed the world in 2050, FAO, Rome 2009.
  2. Röös, E.; Bajželj, B.; Smith, P.; Patel, M.; Little, D.; Garnett, T. Greedy or Needy? Land Use and Climate Impacts of Food in 2050 under Different Livestock Futures. Global Environmental Change 2017, 47, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Falkenmark, M.; Rockström, J.; Karlberg, L. Present and Future Water Requirements for Feeding Humanity. Food Sec. 2009, 1, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Fróna, D.; Szenderák, J.; Harangi-Rákos, M. The Challenge of Feeding the World. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Rubio Ruiz, J.; Giménez García, R.; Naveiro Rilo, J.; Salcedo Joven, V.; Díez Estrada, M.; Mayoral Gómez, A. Estudio Epidemiológico y Clínico Del Melanoma Maligno Cutáneo En El Área Sanitaria de León; 1991; Volume 97, ISBN 978-92-5-107595-1. [Google Scholar]
  6. Queiroz, L.S.; Nogueira Silva, N.F.; Jessen, F.; Mohammadifar, M.A.; Stephani, R.; Fernandes De Carvalho, A.; Perrone, Í.T.; Casanova, F. Edible Insect as an Alternative Protein Source: A Review on the Chemistry and Functionalities of Proteins under Different Processing Methods. Heliyon 2023, 9, e14831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sharma, B.; Yadav, D.K.; Malakar, S.; Singh, S.; Sharma, M.; Suri, S.; Sridhar, K. Insect Proteins – Production Technologies, Bio-Functional, and Food Applications: A Perspective. Food Bioscience 2024, 61, 104560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Scaffardi, L.; Formici, G. (Eds.) Novel Foods and Edible Insects in the European Union: An Interdisciplinary Analysis; Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2022; ISBN 978-3-031-13493-7. [Google Scholar]
  9. Raak, N.; Symmank, C.; Zahn, S.; Aschemann-Witzel, J.; Rohm, H. Processing- and Product-Related Causes for Food Waste and Implications for the Food Supply Chain. Waste Manag 2017, 61, 461–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. 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] [PubMed]
  11. Kouřimská, L.; Adámková, A. Nutritional and Sensory Quality of Edible Insects. NFS Journal 2016, 4, 22–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kolobe, S.D.; Manyelo, T.G.; Sebola, N.A.; Malematja, E.; Monnye, M. Prospects of Rearing Selected Southern African Swarming Insects for Animal Feed: A Review on Insect Farming and the Economic Value of Edible Insects. Agric & Food Secur 2024, 13, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Veldkamp, T.; Bosch, G. Insects: A Protein-Rich Feed Ingredient in Pig and Poultry Diets. Animal Frontiers 2015, 5. [Google Scholar]
  14. Van Zanten, H.H.E.; Mollenhorst, H.; Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Bikker, P.; Meerburg, B.G.; De Boer, I.J.M. From Environmental Nuisance to Environmental Opportunity: Housefly Larvae Convert Waste to Livestock Feed. Journal of Cleaner Production 2015, 102, 362–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Van Huis, A.; Oonincx, D.G.A.B. The Environmental Sustainability of Insects as Food and Feed. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Gere, A. Insect Based Foods a Nutritional Point of View. Nutrition & Food Science International Journal 2017, 4, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Raheem, D.; Carrascosa, C.; Oluwole, O.B.; Nieuwland, M.; Saraiva, A.; Millán, R.; Raposo, A. Traditional Consumption of and Rearing Edible Insects in Africa, Asia and Europe. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 2019, 59, 2169–2188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. 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]
  19. Guiné, R.P.F.; Correia, P.; Coelho, C.; Costa, C.A. The Role of Edible Insects to Mitigate Challenges for Sustainability. Open Agriculture 2021, 6, 24–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Herrero, M.; Wirsenius, S.; Henderson, B.; Rigolot, C.; Thornton, P.; Havlík, P.; De Boer, I.; Gerber, P.J. Livestock and the Environment: What Have We Learned in the Past Decade? Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2015, 40, 177–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Roos, N.; van Huis, A. Consuming Insects: Are There Health Benefits? Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 2017, 3, 225–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Orsi, L.; Voege, L.L.; Stranieri, S. Eating Edible Insects as Sustainable Food? Exploring the Determinants of Consumer Acceptance in Germany. Food Research International 2019, 125, 108573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. 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]
  24. Miglietta, P.; De Leo, F.; Ruberti, M.; Massari, S. Mealworms for Food: A Water Footprint Perspective. Water 2015, 7, 6190–6203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ubesie, A.C.; Ibeziako, N.S.; Ndiokwelu, C.I.; Uzoka, C.M.; Nwafor, C.A. Under-Five Protein Energy Malnutrition Admitted at the University of Nigeria Teaching Hospital, Enugu: A 10 Year Retrospective Review. 2012.
  26. Franco, V.; Hotta, J.; Jorge, S.; dos Santos, J. Plasma Fatty Acids in Children with Grade III Protein-Energy Malnutrition in Its Different Clinical Forms: Marasmus, Marasmic Kwashiorkor, and Kwashiorkor. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics 1999, 45, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Awobusuyi, T.D.; Siwela, M.; Pillay, K. Sorghum–Insect Composites for Healthier Cookies: Nutritional, Functional, and Technological Evaluation. Foods 2020, 9, 1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. 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] [PubMed]
  29. Volden, J. ‘A Wing in the Throat’: Negotiating Edibility in Everyday Insect Consumption. 2024. [Google Scholar]
  30. Kim, T.-K.; Yong, H.I.; Jung, S.; Sung, J.-M.; Jang, H.W.; Choi, Y.-S. Physicochemical and Textural Properties of Emulsions Prepared from the Larvae of the Edible Insects Tenebrio Molitor, Allomyrina Dichotoma, and Protaetia Brevitarsis Seulensis. J Anim Sci Technol 2021, 63, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zielińska, E.; Karaś, M.; Baraniak, B. Comparison of Functional Properties of Edible Insects and Protein Preparations Thereof. LWT 2018, 91, 168–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. 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. European Food Research and Technology 2017, 243, 1157–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Dobermann, D.; Swift, J.A.; Field, L.M. Opportunities and Hurdles of Edible Insects for Food and Feed. Nutrition Bulletin 2017, 42, 293–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Rumpold, B.A.; Schlüter, O.K. Nutritional Composition and Safety Aspects of Edible Insects. Molecular Nutrition and Food Research 2013, 57, 802–823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Tzompa-Sosa, D.A.; Yi, L.; Van Valenberg, H.J.F.; Van Boekel, M.A.J.S.; Lakemond, C.M.M. Insect Lipid Profile: Aqueous versus Organic Solvent-Based Extraction Methods. Food Research International 2014, 62, 1087–1094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Khoushab, F.; Yamabhai, M. Chitin Research Revisited. Marine Drugs 2010, 8, 1988–2012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Bosch, G.; Zhang, S.; Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Hendriks, W.H. Protein Quality of Insects as Potential Ingredients for Dog and Cat Foods. Journal of Nutritional Science 2014, 3, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Ojha, S.; Bekhit, A.E.-D.; Grune, T.; Schlüter, O.K. Bioavailability of Nutrients from Edible Insects. Current Opinion in Food Science 2021, 41, 240–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Lu, M.-X.; Zhu, C.-X.; Smetana, S.; Zhao, M.; Zhang, H.-B.; Zhang, F.; Du, Y.-Z. Minerals in Edible Insects: Review of Content and Potential for Sustainable Sourcing. Food Science and Human Wellness 2023, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mlček, J.; Adámek, M.; Adámková, A.; Borkovcová, M.; Bednářová, M.; Skácel, J. Detection of Selected Heavy Metals and Micronutrients in Edible Insect and Their Dependency on the Feed Using XRF Spectrometry. Potravinarstvo Slovak Journal of Food Sciences 2017, 11, 725–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Christensen, D.L.; Orech, F.O.; Mungai, M.N.; Larsen, T.; Friis, H.; Aagaard-Hansen, J. Entomophagy among the Luo of Kenya: A Potential Mineral Source? International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 2006, 57, 198–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ray, M.; Gangopadhyay, D. Effect of Maturation Stage and Sex on Proximate, Fatty Acid and Mineral Composition of Eri Silkworm (Samia Ricini) from India. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2021, 100, 103898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Elemo, B.O.; Elemo, G.N.; Makinde, M.; Erukainure, O.L. Chemical Evaluation of African Palm Weevil, Rhychophorus Phoenicis, Larvae as a Food Source. Journal of Insect Science 2011, 11, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Van Der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Camenzuli, L.; Van Der Lee, M.K.; Oonincx, D.G.A.B. Uptake of Cadmium, Lead and Arsenic by Tenebrio Molitor and Hermetia Illucens from Contaminated Substrates. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0166186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Truzzi, C.; Illuminati, S.; Girolametti, F.; Antonucci, M.; Scarponi, G.; Ruschioni, S.; Riolo, P.; Annibaldi, A. Influence of Feeding Substrates on the Presence of Toxic Metals (Cd, Pb, Ni, As, Hg) in Larvae of Tenebrio Molitor: Risk Assessment for Human Consumption. IJERPH 2019, 16, 4815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kosečková, P.; Zvěřina, O.; Pěchová, M.; Krulíková, M.; Duborská, E.; Borkovcová, M. Mineral Profile of Cricket Powders, Some Edible Insect Species and Their Implication for Gastronomy. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 2022, 107, 104340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Oonincx, D.G.A.B.; Dierenfeld, E.S. An Investigation Into the Chemical Composition of Alternative Invertebrate Prey. Zoo Biology 2012, 31, 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Tong, L.; Yu, X.; Liu, H. Insect Food for Astronauts: Gas Exchange in Silkworms Fed on Mulberry and Lettuce and the Nutritional Value of These Insects for Human Consumption during Deep Space Flights. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2011, 101, 613–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Abdullahi, N.; Igwe, E.C.; Dandago, M.A.; Yunusa, A.K. CONSUMPTION OF EDIBLE-INSECTS: THE CHALLENGES AND THE PROSPECTS. fsj. food. scientech. j. 2021, 3, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Caparros Megido, R.; Gierts, C.; Blecker, C.; Brostaux, Y.; Haubruge, É.; Alabi, T.; Francis, F. Consumer Acceptance of Insect-Based Alternative Meat Products in Western Countries. Food Quality and Preference 2016, 52, 237–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Mlcek, J.; Rop, O.; Borkovcova, M.; Bednarova, M. A Comprehensive Look at the Possibilities of Edible Insects as Food in Europe – A Review. Pol. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2014, 64, 147–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Belluco, S.; Losasso, C.; Maggioletti, M.; Alonzi, C.C.; Paoletti, M.G.; Ricci, A. Edible Insects in a Food Safety and Nutritional Perspective: A Critical Review. Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe 2013, 12, 296–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kumar, A.; Zhang, K.Y.J. Human Chitinases: Structure, Function, and Inhibitor Discovery. In Targeting Chitin-containing Organisms; Yang, Q., Fukamizo, T., Eds.; Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Springer Singapore: Singapore, 2019; Volume 1142, pp. 221–251. ISBN 9789811373176. [Google Scholar]
  54. Refael, G.; Riess, H.T.; Levi, C.S.; Magzal, F.; Tamir, S.; Koren, O.; Lesmes, U. Responses of the Human Gut Microbiota to Physiologically Digested Insect Powders or Isolated Chitin Thereof. Future Foods 2022, 6, 100197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Morin-Crini, N.; Lichtfouse, E.; Torri, G.; Crini, G. Applications of Chitosan in Food, Pharmaceuticals, Medicine, Cosmetics, Agriculture, Textiles, Pulp and Paper, Biotechnology, and Environmental Chemistry. Environ Chem Lett 2019, 17, 1667–1692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Mei, Z.; Kuzhir, P.; Godeau, G. Update on Chitin and Chitosan from Insects: Sources, Production, Characterization, and Biomedical Applications. Biomimetics 2024, 9, 297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Jantzen Da Silva Lucas, A.; Quadro Oreste, E.; Leão Gouveia Costa, H.; Martín López, H.; Dias Medeiros Saad, C.; Prentice, C. Extraction, Physicochemical Characterization, and Morphological Properties of Chitin and Chitosan from Cuticles of Edible Insects. Food Chemistry 2021, 343, 128550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gachihi, A.; Tanga, C.; Nyambaka, H.; Kimiywe, J. Effect of Processing Methods on Nutrient and Anti-Nutrient Composition of Grasshopper and Termites. CyTA - Journal of Food 2023, 21, 745–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Sánchez-Estrada, M.D.L.L.; Aguirre-Becerra, H.; Feregrino-Pérez, A.A. Bioactive Compounds and Biological Activity in Edible Insects: A Review. Heliyon 2024, 10, e24045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Imathiu, S. Benefits and Food Safety Concerns Associated with Consumption of Edible Insects. NFS Journal 2020, 18, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Murefu, T.R.; Macheka, L.; Musundire, R.; Manditsera, F.A. Safety of Wild Harvested and Reared Edible Insects: A Review. Food Control 2019, 101, 209–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Francis, F.; Doyen, V.; Debaugnies, F.; Mazzucchelli, G.; Caparros, R.; Alabi, T.; Blecker, C.; Haubruge, E.; Corazza, F. Limited Cross Reactivity among Arginine Kinase Allergens from Mealworm and Cricket Edible Insects. Food Chemistry 2019, 276, 714–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Yashung, P.; Narah, J.; Megu, K.; Chakravorty, J. Benefits and Risks of Consuming Edible Insects. DNGCRJ 2020, 5, 35–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Burton, O.T.; Zaccone, P. The Potential Role of Chitin in Allergic Reactions. Trends in Immunology 2007, 28, 419–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Schroeckenstein, D.; Meierdavis, S.; Bush, R. Occupational Sensitivity to Tenebrio Molitor Linnaeus (Yellow Mealworm). Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology 1990, 86, 182–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Mézes, M. Food Safety Aspect of Insects: A Review. Acta Alimentaria 2018, 47, 513–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Conway, A.; Jaiswal, S.; Jaiswal, A.K. The Potential of Edible Insects as a Safe, Palatable, and Sustainable Food Source in the European Union. Foods 2024, 13, 387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Acosta-Estrada, B.A.; Reyes, A.; Rosell, C.M.; Rodrigo, D.; Ibarra-Herrera, C.C. Benefits and Challenges in the Incorporation of Insects in Food Products. Front. Nutr. 2021, 8, 687712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Charlton, A.J.; Dickinson, M.; Wakefield, M.E.; Fitches, E.; Kenis, M.; Han, R.; Zhu, F.; Kone, N.; Grant, M.; Devic, E.; et al. Exploring the Chemical Safety of Fly Larvae as a Source of Protein for Animal Feed. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 2015, 1, 7–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Committee, E.S. Risk Profile Related to Production and Consumption of Insects as Food and Feed. EFSA Journal 2015, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Camenzuli, L.; Belluco, S.; Meijer, N.; Ricci, A. Food Safety Issues Related to Uses of Insects for Feeds and Foods. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 2018, 17, 1172–1183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. 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 and Chemical Toxicology 2017, 100, 70–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Lange, K.W.; Nakamura, Y. Edible Insects as Future Food: Chances and Challenges. Journal of Future Foods 2021, 1, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. EU REGULATION.Pdf.
  75. Mishyna, M.; Keppler, J.K.; Chen, J. Techno-Functional Properties of Edible Insect Proteins and Effects of Processing. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science 2021, 56, 101508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Kim, H.-W.; Setyabrata, D.; Lee, Y.; Jones, O.G.; Kim, Y.H.B. Effect of House Cricket ( Acheta Domesticus ) Flour Addition on Physicochemical and Textural Properties of Meat Emulsion Under Various Formulations. Journal of Food Science 2017, 82, 2787–2793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Bußler, S.; Rumpold, B.A.; Jander, E.; Rawel, H.M.; Schlüter, O.K. Recovery and Techno-Functionality of Flours and Proteins from Two Edible Insect Species: Meal Worm ( Tenebrio Molitor ) and Black Soldier Fly ( Hermetia Illucens ) Larvae. Heliyon 2016, 2, e00218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Stone, A.K.; Tanaka, T.; Nickerson, M.T. Protein Quality and Physicochemical Properties of Commercial Cricket and Mealworm Powders. J Food Sci Technol 2019, 56, 3355–3363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Kröncke, N.; Böschen, V.; Woyzichovski, J.; Demtröder, S.; Benning, R. Comparison of Suitable Drying Processes for Mealworms (Tenebrio Molitor). Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies 2018, 50, 20–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Yi, L.; Lakemond, C.M.M.; Sagis, L.M.C.; Eisner-Schadler, V.; Van Huis, A.; Van Boekel, M.A.J.S. Extraction and Characterisation of Protein Fractions from Five Insect Species. Food Chemistry 2013, 141, 3341–3348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Wu, H.; Morbidelli, M. A Model Relating Structure of Colloidal Gels to Their Elastic Properties. Langmuir 2001, 17, 1030–1036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Żuk-Gołaszewska, K.; Gałęcki, R.; Obremski, K.; Smetana, S.; Figiel, S.; Gołaszewski, J. Edible Insect Farming in the Context of the EU Regulations and Marketing—An Overview. Insects 2022, 13, 446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Traynor, A.; Burns, D.T.; Wu, D.; Karoonuthaisiri, N.; Petchkongkaew, A.; Elliott, C.T. An Analysis of Emerging Food Safety and Fraud Risks of Novel Insect Proteins within Complex Supply Chains. npj Sci Food 2024, 8, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Van Der Sluijs, J.P. Insect Decline, an Emerging Global Environmental Risk. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 2020, 46, 39–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
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.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

Privacy Settings

© 2026 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated