Replacement of soy by mealworms for livestock feed - A comparative review between soy and mealworms considering environmental aspects

Elsheikh, Wadah et al. Article — Published Version Replacement of soy by mealworms for livestock feed - A comparative review between soy and mealworms considering environmental aspects Environment, Development and Sustainability Suggested Citation: Elsheikh, Wadah et al. (2024) : Replacement of soy by mealworms for livestock feed - A comparative review between soy and mealworms considering environmental aspects, Environment, Development and Sustainability, ISSN 1573-2975, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Vol. 27, Iss. 12, pp. 29105-29148, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04874-1 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/333360 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Vol.:(0123456789) Environment, Development and Sustainability (2025) 27:29105–29148 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-024-04874-1 REVIEW Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative review betweensoy andmealworms considering environmental aspects ShahidaAnushaSiddiqui1,2 · WadahElsheikh3· İlknurUcak4· MuzaffarHasan5· ZerlinaCleanthaPerlita6· BaraYudhistira7 Received: 7 February 2024 / Accepted: 1 April 2024 / Published online: 2 May 2024 © The Author(s) 2024 Abstract The urgent need for sustainable alternatives to conventional livestock feed has prompted research into novel protein sources. This review paper systematically evaluates the prospect of replacing soy with mealworms in livestock feed, focusing on comprehensive comparisons of nutritional content and environmental considerations. The nutritional profiles of soy and mealworms are analyzed in terms of amino acid composition and digestibility. The total essential amino acids in mealworms are 26.02g/100g while in mealworms total EAA is 31.49g/100g. The protein content in mealworm is high (51.93g/100g) in comparison to soy meal (44.51g/100g). Environmental aspects, including deforestation, pesticide use, water consumption, land use, and greenhouse gas emissions, are scrutinized for both soy cultivation and mealworm farming.One kg of mealworm meal yields 141.3MJ energy use, 3.8kg CO2 equivalent for climate change, 25.6g SO2 equivalent for acidification, 15.0g PO4 equivalent for eutrophication, and 4.1 m2 land use. It’s more potent per kg of protein than soybean or fish meal. Feasibility, scalability, and economic considerations are explored to understand the practical implications for livestock farmers. Consumer perception and regulatory frameworks are also addressed, highlighting potential challenges and strategies for acceptance. The paper concludes by synthesizing key findings and offering recommendations for stakeholders interested in the sustainable integration of mealworms into mainstream livestock agriculture. This comparative review provides a holistic understanding of the potential environmental benefits and challenges associated with replacing soy with mealworms in livestock feed. Extended author information available on the last page of the article 29106 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Graphical abstract Keywords Livestock meal· Protein· Environment· Soybean· Edible insects Abbreviations GHG Greenhouse gas LCA Life cycle assessment NSP Non-starch polysaccharides ANF Anti-nutritional factors PUFA Polyunsaturated fatty acids MJ Megajoule FCR Feed conversion rate SBM Soybean meal MWL Mealworms larvae MWM Mealworm meal CP Crude protein AA Amino acid CFU Colony forming units LAB Lactic acid bacteria GGT Gamma glutamyl transferase Eq Equivalent ADG Average daily gain ADFI Average daily feed intake 29107 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… FBW Final body weight WG Weight gain BSF Black soldier fly DHR Dried hotel residues CAGR Compound annual growth rate DFW Dehydrated food wastes DM Dry matter GOT Glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase ANFs Anti-nutritional factors IgA Immunoglobulin A IgM Immunoglobulin M 1 Introduction Sustainable production of healthy food for a growing global population, in the face of the uncertainties of climate change, represents a major challenge for the coming decade. The UN Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) estimates that the world will have to produce 70% more food by 2050 (Truong etal., 2019). In the face of human population growth, increased longevity, and the uncertainties of climate change, the ability to sustainably produce sufficient food to feed the world is of increasing concern. Concerning animal protein production, the International Feed Industry Federation believes that the production of meat (poultry, swine, and beef) will even double (Veldkamp & Bosch, 2015). Livestock provide food with high nutritional value but are frequently fed on human-edible crops and are associated with significant production of greenhouse gases (GHG). This poses severe challenges to the global capacity to provide enough animal feed. Feed is a key pillar in the journey of improving the productivity of livestock production to increase the contribution of this sub-sector to the overall economic growth. To improve the productivity of livestock under smallholder farmers’ conditions, quality feed is the main determinant factor. Currently, important protein ingredients for animal feed are fish meal, processed animal proteins and soybean meal (Sánchez-Muros etal., 2016). Still, feed quality and safety are the big questions even in the commercial feed sector due to the high price of ingredients and compound feeds (Kassymbek etal., 2023). Soybean meal serves as the primary protein source in animal production. Nonetheless, it is hampered by anti-nutritional factors like trypsin inhibitors and antigen proteins, which diminish its nutritional quality and hinder animal production (Yuan etal., 2017). The current production systems for livestock are an unsustainable use of natural resources; animals are often fed on crops that are edible by humans and that require a high proportion of the planet’s water resources, as well as producing a significant proportion of global GHG emissions. In recent years, insects have attracted increasing attention as both a human food and an animal feed ingredient. They are frequently considered to be a rich source of essential nutrients that can be grown on lowvalue feeds and have a low carbon footprint. Insects are such an alternative animal protein source because they can sustainably be reared on organic side streams and they have a favourable feed conversion efficiency (Veldkamp etal., 2012), likely because they are cold blooded. Insects identified as most 29108 S.A.Siddiqui et al. promising for industrial production in the Western world are the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens), common housefly (Musca domestica), and yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor, TM). Recently, there is an interest in the utilisation of insects such as black soldier fly larvae, maggot meal, earthworm and mealworm as potential replacement of soya-bean and fishmeal as protein source in poultry ration (Van Huis etal., 2013; Khan etal., 2016). Even though mealworms have many benefits, it’s crucial to remember that the choice of insect for producing feed is dependent on a number of variables, such as the target animals’ unique nutritional needs, cost-effectiveness, and geographical availability. Further insights and advances in the use of different insect species for animal feed may also be revealed by continuing study in the field of insect farming. TM, well-known mealworm, represents one of the most interesting edible insects studied as feed and food as it can be easily reared and maintained at early stages and also due to its larval size (Ghaly & Alkoaik, 2009; Morales- Ramos etal., 2012). The edible larvae of the common pest insect TM (yellow mealworm; YMW) distributed worldwide are a good source of protein, fat, vitamins, and minerals (Kim etal., 2014). YMWs contain high-quality protein (Shockley & Dossey, 2014), and contain more essential amino acids than soybeans (Yi etal., 2013). In addition, they have higher unsaturated fatty acid content than meat, and are relatively rich in vitamin A and iron (Rumpold & Schlüter, 2013). Meal-worms have been grown on dried and cooked waste materials from fruits, vegetables, and cereals in various combinations (Ramos-Elor- duy etal., 2002). For future utilization of insects as sustainable animal feed ingredients, it is important to grow them from sources that cannot be included directly in feed for pigs or poultry. Mealworms are the larvae of two species of darkling beetles of the Tenebrionidae family: the yellow mealworm beetle (YMB) (Tenebrio molitor L.), and the smaller and less common dark or mini mealworm beetle (Tenebrio obscurus Fabricius). Mealworms are easy to breed and feed, and have a valuable protein profile. For these reasons, they are produced industrially as feed for pets and zoo animals, including birds, reptiles, small mammals, batrachians, and fish. They are usually fed live, but they are also sold canned, dried, or in powder form (Veldkamp etal., 2012). Mealworms are useful for their high protein content. They are also used as fishing bait. They are commercially available in bulk and are sold in containers of bran or oatmeal. In 2015, it was discovered that mealworms are capable of degrading polystyrene into usable organic matter at a rate of about 0.35–0.40mg/day (Finke & Winn, 2004). Various types of waste generated in the environment are primarily categorized as organic, plastic, agricultural, and industrial waste. Consequently, a range of strategies, including photo catalysis of organic waste, are employed to address waste issues and mitigate associated risks (Zinatloo-Ajabshir etal., 2019). Utilizing green technologies to convert toxic organic waste into valuable salts is one of the most prevalent methods to counter environmental hazards and protect human health (Tabatabaeinejad etal., 2021; Zinatloo- Ajabshir & Salavati-Niasari, 2016; 2019, 2020). Likewise, employing green technologies such as insect rearing shows significant promise in transforming these wastes into highvalue products for consumption, benefiting both human health and the environment. The mealworm is very efficient at bio converting organic waste. For this reason, this species is receiving increasing attention, as they could collectively convert 1.3 billion tons of biowaste per year (Veldkamp etal., 2012). Figure1 is briefly explaining the mechanism of conversion of agricultural and other wastes into useful by-products through the mealworm. 29109 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… 2 Different combinations ofmealworms andsoy inlivestock feed fordifferent purposes 2.1 Combination ofmealworms andplants Chokeberry is primarily grown in the eastern and southern regions of Europe as an industrial crop, while it has a historical tradition of medicinal use in North America (Kokotkiewicz etal., 2010; Seidemann, 1993). Chokeberry serves as a key component in the production of juices, wines, jams, and functions as both a coloring agent and a nutritional supplement (Kulling & Rawel, 2008). Chokeberries contain carbohydrate (15%), protein (1%), fat (1%), dietary fiber (7%), and also offer a significant amount of vitamin C. They contain a moderate quantity of vitamin K, and boast a wealth of antioxidants, such as anthocyanins, quercetin, and resveratrol. Nonetheless, the management of chokeberry waste presents a significant environmental challenge. The process of pelleting chokeberry by-product (CBP) meal not only minimizes food waste but also contributes to recycling within the poultry industry, providing a sustainable solution to the problem of chokeberry waste disposal. In this regard, the incorporation of pelleted Tenebrio molitor (TM) powder along with CBP meal represents a means to enhance Fig. 1 A concise explanation of the mechanism for converting agricultural and plastic waste using mealworms 29110 S.A.Siddiqui et al. poultry production and meat quality by reducing feed wastage (Jeong 2022) (Fig.2). Choi (2023) explored the impact of incorporating pelleted TM powder and CBP meal into the diet on the growth characteristics and meat quality of Pekin ducks. Authors found the significant difference in final body weight (FBW), weight gain (WG) and feed conversion ratio (FCR) (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the incorporation of up to 3% pelleted TM powder alongside CBP meal in the duck diets enhanced growth production and antioxidant attributes in the quality of duck meat. The authors suggested that the improved growth performance and meat quality might be attributed to the effects of pelleting, which results in higher digestibility and a well-balanced nutrient supply (Abdollahi etal., 2019), as well as the interaction of bioactive compounds, such as the phenolic constituents found in TM powder and CBP meal (Kulling & Rawel, 2008). Park etal. (2023), investigated the effect of feeding combination diet to mealworm protein hydrolysate (MWPH) and cranberry fruit extract (CFE) on mouse growth. The authors noted that adding MWPH and CFE to the regimen enhanced their anti-inflam- matory effects through the regulation of cytokine activation, lowered the expression of IL-1, improved immune function, reduced the population of harmful gut bacteria, and increased the levels of antioxidant enzymes in the serum. Fig. 2 Illustrating the integration of mealworms and plant waste in enhancing both poultry production and meat quality 29111 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… 2.2 Combination ofsoy andalga orbacteria (fermented soy feed) In a study conducted by Wang etal., 2018), the impact of supplementing sow diets with fermented mixed feed (FMF) during lactation on the performance of both sows and their offspring was examined. The authors observed that co-fermentation of corn and soybean meal (SBM) mixed feed with Bacillus subtilis ZJU12 and Enterococcus faecium had a positive impact on nutrient availability and utilization. This treatment also led to improvements in milk yield and milk IgA content. The authors proposed that during co-fermenta- tion, Bacillus subtilis ZJU12 effectively reduced trypsin inhibitor and other anti-nutritional factors (ANFs), while increasing the crude protein and small peptide content (Seo & Cho, 2016). Furthermore, the FMF provided sows with a rich source of live Bacillus subtilis ZJU12 and Enterococcus faecium cells, along with their metabolites, including lactic acid and enzymes. Yuan etal., (2017) substitute the plasma protein (PP) and soybean protein concentrate (SBPC) with fermented soybean meal (FSBM) in swine feed. The authors administered the piglets with fermented SBM and studied the effect of fermented SBM on piglet performance. The SBM was co-fermented with Bacillus subtilis, Hansenula anomala and Lactobacillus casei in 2:1:2 ratios. The results showed that 10% fermented SBM improved average daily gain (ADG), and feed conversion ratio (FCR). The substitution with fermented SBM in piglet diet had improved nutrient digestibility and also improved gut microflora (Fig.3). Reports indicate that utilizing FSBM in piglet diets Fig. 3 Fermented soybean meal (FSBM) for animal feed. a The role of fermentation in SBM conversion into nutritious and functional SBM, b the advantageous outcomes of consuming FSBM 29112 S.A.Siddiqui et al. with Bacillus subtilis can serve as a highly digestible protein source (Nam etal., 2012). This is attributed to the significant protein hydrolysis into amino acids and peptides. Furthermore, the inclusion of Lactobacillus enhances intestinal function, fosters nutrient digestion and absorption, and regulates immune function (Vanbelle et al., 1990; Yuan etal., 2017). This study demonstrated that fermenting SBM with the ideal microbial blend could substantially reduce trypsin inhibitor and antigen protein levels while increasing soybean peptide content six-fold. These results surpass those obtained from single microbial fermentation, as reported previously (Hachmeister & Fung, 1993; Mital & Garg, 1990). Similarly Feng etal., (2007) feed the broiler chicks with Aspergillus oryzae fermented SBM and observed that FSBM supplemented broilers achieved high ADG and ADFI (P < 0.05) in comparison to SBM feeded. FSBM also enhanced the level of phosphorus and IgM in the serum. Fermentation changed the physical and nutritional characteristics of soybean meal. Several studies have been reported that after fermentation of SBM crude protein, dry matter, crude fat increased, and carbohydrate content decreased. In addition, various reported showed that fermented SBM improved weight gain; feed efficiency, phosphorus bioavailability in broiler chicks (Chah etal., 1975; Hirabayashi etal., 1998; Zamora & Veum, 1979) and similarly in pigs (Kiers etal., 2003). Chah etal. (1975) suggested that the enhanced growth-promoting effects of fermented soybeans primarily resulted from an increased provision of essential amino acids and potentially vitamins synthesized by the fungi. Fermented soy-based products offer high digestibility and nutritional value, providing essential nutrients such as calcium, as well as Vitamins A and B, while also possessing functional properties. In addition, employing Aspergillus oryzae in the fermentation process can enhance the nutritional quality of soybeans and soybean meal. This underscores the potential of utilizing FSBM with reduced trypsin inhibitor levels and an increased concentration of small-size peptides as a promising alternative to animal-derived protein ingredients in young animal diets (Hong etal. (2004). The presence of anti-nutritional factors (ANFs) in SBM significantly impacts both oxidative balance and immune responses in fish. The Aspergillus awamori fermented SBM significantly reduced the contents of ANFs in SBM, including raffinose (− 98.8%), stachyose (− 80%), trypsin inhibitors (− 80%), glycinin (− 98.5%), and β-conglycinin (− 97.4%). The FSBM also enhanced the height of enterocyte and microvilli in turbot fish (Scophthalmus maximus L.) (Li etal., 2019). Wu etal. (2020), used high temperature Bacillus stearothermophillus FSBM and antibiotic growth promoters (AGP) free feed as dietary supplements to broiler chicks to investigate the effect on growth performance. Authors found that the aforementioned dietary supplement improved the intestinal gut microflora, increased the weight of thymus and bursa of Fabricius, and also enhanced glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase (GOT) level in serum. Similarly, Lactobacillus plantarum FSBM was used as dietary supplement for turkey which improved the histology of the small intestine and stimulated the antioxidant and immune system (Chachaj etal., 2019a, 2019b). Histomorphological examinations had revealed that substituting a portion of soybean meal with fermented soybean meal in turkey diets led to an elevation in villus height and the villus height/crypt depth ratio. Furthermore, it’s noteworthy that the fermentation of soybean meal notably reduces the levels of allergenic proteins such as glycinin and β-conglycinin. The enhanced morphological characteristics of the intestine facilitated increased nutrient absorption and led to higher body weight gains in the birds, along with an improved feed conversion ratio (FCR) (Chachaj etal., 2019a, 2019b). In their study, Cheng etal., (2019) examined the optimal conditions for the mixed solid-state fermentation (SSF) of soybean meal using protease and probiotics, and assessed the impact of FSBM on broilers. 29119 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… grains. One of the main contributors to the anti-nutritional effects of soybeans is their presence of thermo-stable anti-nutritional components, which include non-starch polysaccharides (NSP) and oligosaccharides. The insoluble NSP is made up of cellulose polymers and certain hemicelluloses. Monogastric animals rely on bacterial fermentation for digestion because they lack the enzymes needed to hydrolyze these sugars (Bueno etal., 2018). The major category of anti-nutritional factors (ANF) found in raw beans is trypsin inhibitors. Heat inactivates this ANF, allowing higher quantities of soy beans to be used in animal feed. Heat, on the other hand, enhances the occurrence of Maillard reactions, lowering the digestibility of the soy bean (Ibáñez etal., 2020). Pigs have a limited ability to digest phytic acid, which is associated with phosphorus in soy products (Degola etal., 2019). Many studies have linked economically important features of soybean production, including productivity and oil or protein content (Bueno etal., 2018). Generally, soybean seeds contain 5.6 to 11.5% water, 32 to 43.6% crude protein, 15.5 to 24.7% fat, 4.5 to 6.4% crude ash, 10.9 to 14.9% neutral detergent fiber, 9.1 to 11.1% acid detergent fiber, and 31.7 to 31.8 percent carbohydrates on a dry matter basis (Banaszkiewicz, 2011). The protein and fat content of soybeans is high. Soybeans are used as a source of protein and fat all over the world in feed. Soybean offers the highest level of crude protein and the ideal balance of amino acids of any legume seed. Comparatively to other vegetable meals with high protein contents, the raw fiber content (approximately 6%) is lower in soybeans. Due to this, they are employed in the process of making soybean oil, which is then utilized to make a very desirable animal feed. Soybeans have a good amino acid profile in addition to being abundant in protein. Soybean protein contains enough amino acids to supplement grain protein and satisfy the demands of animals. However, tryptophan and sulfuric amino acids are unsatisfactory in soybeans. Soybean protein has the highest level of lysine and methionine digestibility (Degola etal., 2019). Soybean oil is frequently used as a feedgrade fat in broiler chicken rations to increase the energy density of feeds and increase feed utilization efficiency (Saleh etal., 2021). This is due to the need to create high-energy diets for modern breeds, as well as the oil’s high digestibility and metabolisable energy content. Several variables, including climate changes, genetics, terrain, and soil quality, impact the chemical makeup of soybeans, particularly the content of amino acids (Degola etal., 2019). The amount of fat in soybeans is another crucial quantitative aspect of nutrition. Soybeans fat composition that is approximately 10%–15% saturated fatty acids, 19–41% monounsaturated fatty acids, and 46%–62% polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). Soybean oil has a high energy value. About 99% of the triglycerides in the lipid fraction of soybean seeds are polyunsaturated fatty acids (linoleic and linolenic) and unsaturated oleic acid, both of which are abundant in the lipid fraction (Messina, 2016). The quality of soybean oil is determined by the fatty acid makeup. Because oleic, linoleic, and linoleic acids, among other unsaturated fatty acids, are abundant in soy bean oil, it has a high nutritional value. The high PUFA content of soybean oil has been connected to linoleic acid’s function in reproduction and appears to have an energy-independent effect on enhancing reproductive health in dairy cattle. A significant food and feed ingredient is soybeans. Only marginally did nitrogen fertilizer affect the fatty acid makeup of the different soybean types. The soybean is a good source of several vitamins and minerals, particularly potassium (Messina, 2016). The seed type, environmental circumstances during bean growth, harvest, and storage, as well as the method used to extract the oil, all has an impact on the chemical composition, protein quality, and nutritional value of commercial soy beans (Ibáñez etal., 2020). According to Szostak etal., the genetic characteristics of the variety as well as agro-tech- nical elements, particularly nitrogen fertilization, affect the protein content of legumes. 29120 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Furthermore, genetic differences in Glycine soybean biotypes have been found, suggesting that their chemical contents may differ. Soybean products in non-ruminant diets can provide acceptable performance only if diets are properly prepared or anti-nutritive elements are eliminated. Nutrient content, bioavailability, and anti-nutritive characteristics, as well as their impact on the performance of animals, when soybean proteins are exposed to various processing steps, their quality increases (Dei, 2011; Ibáñez etal., 2020).The methods involved either minimizing or removing the ANFs in the beans, significantly improving the dietary value of all animal species. The phases of the processing can have an impact on the protein’s quality, depending on the circumstances. The heat used in processing has been found to be the single most critical element influencing quality of the protein in soybean meal. Proteins and amino acids are negatively impacted by high processing temperatures for oilseeds because denaturation or the production of Maillard reaction products occurs (Dei, 2011). Soybean agriculture alone consumes the majority of the area required for animal product production (Stein etal., 2013). The soluble carbohydrates in defatted flakes are taken out to produce soy protein concentrate. Either ethanol extraction or enzymatic degradation can be used to achieve this. Soybean protein concentrate is helpful as a starter feed for piglets and as a milk replacement feed for calves. This is because it only has a very little amount of antigenic substances and heat-stable oligosaccharides. It may replace dried skim milk, whey powder, and fishmeal in pig starter feed, and it has virtually replaced dry skim milk in milk replacer feed (Degola etal., 2019; Dei, 2011). There was a need to look for alternatives since soybean meal is expensive and because agricultural projects and their production are influenced by the climatic and financial conditions of the nations that produce soybeans. This suggests that there is a pressing need to identify fresh, affordable protein sources for animal production that can provide the same nutrients as soybean and fish meal. One source that might be exploited is insects. Insects provide a viable protein alternative that is suitable for use in both food and feed due to their high protein content. Insects are particularly intriguing for the production of food and feed because of their nutrient makeup and simplicity of upbringing. For instance, the yellow mealworm, Tenebrio molitor L., has the potential to take the place of frequently used protein sources in livestock diets. Mealworms are easy to grow and don’t need a lot of room for production (Selaledi etal., 2020). Such rising demand for livestock products can be met by identifying and utilizing alternative animal feeding options, which will be critical in developing the animal production sector (Pinotti etal., 2021). Various insect species have been recognized as possible alternatives and more sustainable feed components for cattle in recent years due to their capacity to transform by-products into products rich in protein and other vital nutrients (Adhikari etal., 2021). Insects are extensively used as food and feed throughout Asia, Africa, and the Americas, while entomophagy is uncommon in Europe. On the other hand, during the past ten years, the use of insects as food and feed has increased. There has been a lot of interest in insects as a food source ever since 2015, when they were recognized as such in the European Union. One of the insects that are most often produced in Europe for feed and food is the yellow mealworm (Bordiean etal., 2020). Mealworms are a great alternative to conventional livestock feed because of their identical essential amino acid content and nutritional profile to that of fish and soybean meal. According to various researches on the diets of hens, the whole or partial substitution of fish or soybean meal with mealworms led to equivalent or even slightly improved growth performance and digestibility (Toviho & Bársony, 2022). According to several studies, it was discovered that adding 10% dry mealworms to dry matter at the beginning of the broiler diet had no negative effects on feed intake, body weight gain, or feed efficiency. Mealworms are very palatable and can take the 29121 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… place of base feed, especially fish meal and soybean meal, according to several studies. The egg ratio produced by the usage of dry mealworms was 2.4%, which was higher than that of other basal diets (Makkar etal., 2014). Numerous insect meals have been investigated as possible alternatives to fishmeal in animal diets. As compared to insect-free diets, dietary insect meals significantly affected growth performance, digestibility, and meat quality, notably the fatty acid profile of fed fish (Gasco etal., 2019). Yellow mealworm has been stated to be one of the most recognized insects as a viable substitute protein due to its availability and low cost (Tran etal., 2021). Protein, lipid, and nitrogen-free extracts of yellow mealworm have been shown to contain between 47.2% and 66.3%, 14.9% to 43.1%, and 2.8% to 3.4%, respectively. In order to show the link between keywords when creating a bibliometric map of the mealworm for the years 2013–2023, Pubmed was used to collate the data (Fig.4). Where the large circles in the figure represent the terms that the authors most frequently employ, including "Tenebrio molitor," "animal," "animal nutrition," and "yellow mealworm”. Based on this bibliometric mapping, we could categorize the terms into five distinct sets. Animal, feed, Tenebrio molitor, and nutrient value were among the keywords in the first group (red). Chicken, diet, insect meal, and growth performance make up some of group 2’s (green) components. Insect proteins, biomass, and entomology make up certain parts of Group 3 (blue). Yellow mealworm, larvae, and dietary protein made up group 4 (yellow). Mealworms, poultry, and animal nutritional physiology made up several of Group 5 (purple). Furthermore, the yellow mealworm is rich in vitamins, minerals, and other biologically beneficial substances (Nowak etal., 2016). Depending on the environment’s temperature, photoperiod, relative humidity, and other factors, yellow mealworms have a life cycle that lasts between 280 and 630days (Makkar etal., 2014). Insects may transform organic byproducts, resulting in economic gains by lowering trash generation and environmental contamination. Insects can use waste as a safe feedstock and Fig. 4 A bibliometric map of mealworms in animal feed 29122 S.A.Siddiqui et al. bio-convert it into high-quality goods with little help from other resources (Bordiean etal., 2020; Makkar etal., 2014). Yellow mealworm can successfully replace fish or soymeal in livestock or fisheries. Plant protein digestion can be difficult for carnivorous fish species; however, mealworm larval meal and oil can be an efficient and nutrient-dense dietary resource. Mealworms can also be fed to chickens and other domestic birds to enhance their diets (Grau etal., 2017). The chemical composition of mealworms is high in crude protein (47–60%) and lipid (31–43%). Fresh larvae have a water content of about 60%. They have a low ash content (5% dry matter) and, like other insects, a very low Ca: P ratio. It should be noted that diet has an influence on the composition, which is highly variable. The amount of essential amino acids in the meal is sufficient. Mealworm food has certain fatty acid compositions with housefly maggot meal and house cricket meal. In comparison to black army fly larvae, mealworm larvae had much higher levels of linoleic acid and significantly lower levels of lauric acid, respectively (Makkar etal., 2014). In general, insects contain less methionine and cysteine and more lysine and threonine, two amino acids that are insufficient in the four most often consumed cereals: wheat, rice, cassava, and maize. Mealworm larvae are also low in calcium but rich in phosphorus; nevertheless, when compared to larvae and beetles, the excreta and exuvium components had the highest calcium concentration (Ravzanaadii etal., 2012). A calcium deficiency and symptoms of metabolic bone disease can occur from feeding mealworms solely to chickens. As a result, calcium supplementation for mealworms is suggested (Selaledi etal., 2020). Table3 lists a few of the negative and positive effects of mealworms related to their nutritional value in animal nutrition. Compared to more common protein sources like soy bean meal, mealworm manufacturing may be less expensive. Additionally, mealworms improve the growth performance and feed utilization efficiency of poultry diets (Hussain etal., 2017). Economic production parameters for mealworms include requiring less space, having commercial production capabilities, having high conversion efficiency, and utilising organic waste as a food source in a relative sense (Selaledi etal., 2020). Mealworms have higher protein content (51.93%) than soy beans (44.51%), per Bovera etal. (2015). In comparison to maggots and silkworms, mealworms are the best insect meal substitute, according to Khan etal. (2017); they improve broiler performance and meat quality. The concentration of components increases as mealworms go through their metamorphosis (Simon etal., 2013). Comparing mealworms to maggots and silkworms, Khan etal. (2017) found that mealworms are the best insect meal substitute because they improve broiler performance and meat quality. The concentration of essential minerals, including calcium, phosphorus, and zinc, is critical during the transformation stages of mealworms (Simon etal., 2013). Table4 shows a comparison of the nutritional composition of mealworm and soymeal. Insects can significantly aid in the sustainable recycling of low-grade bio resources, such as agricultural byproducts (Adhikari etal., 2021). Because the nutritional profiles of mealworm pupae and larvae are comparable, larvae may not always benefit more from the pupal stage in terms of nutrient content and nutrient utilization. Mealworm adults may be a significant source of bioactive substances that have positive effects on the immune system and animal health (Khanal etal., 2023). Previous studies also highlighted that the mealworm larvae may be grown to an appropriate size using agricultural by-products, including resources derived from wheat (Zhang etal., 2019). Mealworms may be used as a substitute feed for monogastric and ruminant animals, according to Khanal etal. (2023). Khanal etal. (2023) imply that larvae and pupae usually had a similar nutritional profile, with crude fiber, crude protein, and total amino acid contents that were lower and crude fat, total fatty acid, and gross energy levels that were greater in comparison to adults. Overall essential and non-essential amino acid concentrations in larvae and pupae were comparable to those 29123 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… Table 3 The negative and positive effects of mealworms in animal feeding Advantages Disadvantages References A greater immunological response and improved disease resistance, because of the lower albumin-to-globulin ratio in broilers Insufficient calcium and symptoms of metabolic bone disease in poultry Bovera etal. (2015), Ravzanaadii etal. (2012) A beneficial effect on the blood chemistry measures and carcass traits of broilers Negatively affect feed efficiency and intestinal morphology in poultry Biasato etal. (2017), Biasato etal. (2016) May decrease the use of antibiotics in the poultry industry A detrimental impact on the nutritional digestibility of organic matter and crude protein van Huis etal. (2013), Bovera etal. (2016) The existence of chitin in mealworms has the potential to improve poultry health because it decreases populations of intestinal Escherichia coli anddd Salmonella spp. The cost is relatively expensive Selaledi etal. (2020), Shafique etal. (2021) Improves growth performance in poultry diet Hussain etal. (2017) A positive effect related to mealworms utilization may cause the Gamma glutamyl transferase (GGT) reduction. The high GGT content in birds is a sign of liver illness and issues with bile flow Ognik and Krauze (2016) Increased the feed intake, average daily gain, and gain-to-feed ratio in feeding weaning pigs Jin etal. (2016) Reducing blood urea nitrogen and boosting insulin-like growth factor in feeding pigs Jin etal. (2016) 29124 S.A.Siddiqui et al. in soybean meal sold in stores. However, in line with the majority of previous findings, the soybean meal’s amino acids differed according to the nation of origin (i.e., the region where the beans were grown). Numerous studies have suggested that the amount of protein in the seed has an effect on the amino acid composition of the soybean meal. As a matter of fact, the majority of data show that when the protein concentration in the seed increased, the relative abundance of several amino acids, such as lysine, methionine, cysteine, tryptophan, and threonine, which are frequently growth inhibitors in non-ruminant species, decreased. Overall, the data presented here support the notion that the nutritional value of soybean meal from various origins should be determined by crude protein content while also taking into account variations in the amino acid profile of the protein portion of the meals (Khanal etal., 2023). Figure5 shows the content of essential amino acids in mealworms (larva stage) and soymeal. The figure makes it abundantly evident how comparable the amino acid compositions of mealworms and soybeans are, as well as how mealworms excel in certain amino acids, including alanine, tyrosine, glycine, valine, and histidine. Table 4 Chemical composition of mealworm and soybean meal in livestock feed a Hussain etal. (2017) b Bovera etal. (2015) c Son etal. (2021) d Ravzanaadii etal. (2012) Nutrient Component Mealworm Feed Soy Feed Energy, mcal/kg 2.97 a2.51 Protein, g/100g 51.93 44.51 Carbohydrates, g/100g 11.45 c40 Fat, g/100g 21.57 1.84 Fiber, % 7.2 4.79 Ash, % 4.69 6.13 Calcium, % g/kg 4.3 0.33 Phosphorus, % 7.1 0.735 Potassium, % 9.4 2.25 Magnesium, % 2 0.31 EAA g/100 g protein d Threonine, % 2.71 3.43 Valine, % 3.72 4.09 Methionine, % 1.62 3.18 Phenylalanine, % 1.53 No Isoleucine, % 4.52 4.64 Leucine, % 4.52 4.64 Lysine, % 1.68 2.83 Arginine, % 3.61 6.17 Histidine, % 2.11 2.51 29125 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… 5 Life cycle assessment (LCA) andenvironmental perspectives ofmealworms andsoy feed The livestock industry currently uses more than 70% of all agricultural land, and it is responsible for 15% of all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions produced. GHG emissions and other environmental characteristics are influenced by people’s eating choices. A recommended mitigating technique is to switch to proteins from lower-impact animal species (Oonincx & De Boer, 2012). Reducing the impact of protein synthesis from animal sources on the environment has become crucial. As a result, research is being done on protein-rich insects as a potential replacement for traditional protein sources, minimizing both environmental harm and dietary costs. This is owing to insects’ low water requirements and the possibility of breeding them on bio-waste substrates and organic side streams, as well as their high nutritional value and high lipid, mineral, and vitamin content (Makkar etal., 2014). Insects (2–122g/kg mass growth) contribute far less to GHG emissions than beef cattle (2850g/kg mass gain), while pigs (80–1130g/kg mass gain) contribute even less. GHG emissions and other environmental factors, such as the use of land or fossil fuels, must be weighed when deciding between different sources of animal protein. According to Oonincx and Boer (2012), the widely used method of LCA has been used to evaluate these characteristics for a range of animal products. LCA investigates the complex relationship between the environment and a product by evaluating environmental characteristics as well as the possible repercussions connected with a product’s life cycle. The LCA of a certain product includes all stages of the life cycle, beginning with the extraction of raw materials from nature and continuing with all Fig. 5 Essential amino acid content in mealworms and soymeal 29126 S.A.Siddiqui et al. industrial and manufacturing processes, consumption, and ultimate product disposal (Lapola etal., 2014). In an LCA, predetermined metrics are measured during the whole life cycle of a product. For mealworms, for example, not only are the direct GHG emissions from respiration analyzed and allocated to a product, but also the GHG emissions from the manufacture and distribution of feed, as well as emissions from the heating of the climatecontrolled raising facility (Oonincx & De Boer, 2012). Since it consumes a lot of water, energy, and land and generates a lot of greenhouse gases and ammonia, mass animal production has a negative environmental effect. The production of livestock is responsible for 80% of the GHG emissions produced in the agricultural sector, including emissions from grazing land, energy used to cultivate cereals for feed, and transportation of grain and meat for processing and sale. Mealworms have a 4341 m3/t water footprint per edible ton, which is 3.5 times less than beef and the same as chicken meat (Miglietta etal., 2015). Although producing 1kg of fresh mealworms requires about the same amount of energy as producing beef or pig, cattle, chicken, and pork require a lot more land (Oonincx & De Boer, 2012). When compared to animals, mealworms produced much less ammonia and GHG (CO2, N2O, and CH4). These gases are particularly significant because of their negative impacts on eutrophication, air quality, and the global climate (IPCC, 2013). Mealworms also require less area to produce 1kg of edible protein than animals (Nowak etal., 2016). Feed conversion efficiency is another factor to consider while growing animals. Mealworms convert feed as effectively as chickens and utilize nitrogen more efficiently than traditional cattle when fed an appropriate diet. Furthermore, high-protein diets increase larval survival and decrease growth time (Oonincx etal., 2015). Mealworms may thus be raised in a more ecologically friendly manner than cattle while obtaining comparable nutritional qualities, hence encouraging their usage as a protein source for human consumption (Grau etal., 2017). There is little environmental LCA study on insects. In order to assess the potential environmental effects associated with the production of kg of mealworm protein, Dreyer etal. (2021) examined the LCA of yellow mealworms as an organic raw material. Their research shows that the environmental effects of producing 1kg of edible mealworm protein are equal to 20.4kg CO2-eq for global warming potential, 213.66MJ-eq for non-renewable energy use, 22.38 m2 for agricultural land occupation, 159.52g SO2-eq for terrestrial acidification potential, and 12.41g P-eq for freshwater eutrophication potential. This study confirmed the potential of mealworms as a sustainable source of protein and provided insights on their environmental impact in comparison to traditional animal production systems (Dreyer etal., 2021). A comparison of the environmental performance of mealworm and soybeans during the production process is presented in Table5. This indicates that the production of mealworm meal has a greater environmental impact, particularly in terms of energy usage, when compared to soybeans. Table 5 Comparison of the environmental performance of mealworms and soy during the production process Factors Mealworms (Thévenot etal., 2018) Soy (Wilfart etal. 2016) Land use (m2a) 6.35 4.34 Climate change (kgCO2 eq) 5.77 4.09 Cumulative energy demand (MJ) 217.37 31.17 Eutrophication (gPO4 eq) 23.03 16.45 Acidification (gSO2 eq) 39.38 17.61 29127 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… The biological life cycle of mealworms is brief. The duration of the egg incubation phase is 3–9days, the larval stage is 26–76days, the nymph stage is 3–12days, and the pupal stage is 5–17 days. However, given that larvae are raised in this facility for 11–13weeks, these figures appear to be underestimated (Li etal. (2013).Mealworm larval meal’s environmental performance was assessed using LCA by Thévenot etal. (2018). The results show that the production of mealworm meal (MWM) has a bigger environmental impact than the production of other protein sources utilized in animal feed, especially in terms of energy needs. The effects of one kg of MWM are 141.3MJ of cumulative energy use, 3.8kg of CO2 equivalent for climate change, 25.6g of SO2 equivalent for possible acidification, 15.0g of PO4 equivalent for potential eutrophication, and 4.1 m2 of land utilization. In terms of effects per kg of protein, these are more potent than those of soybean or fish meal. Mealworm zootechnical developments are projected to be considerable, which should improve the performance of the latter in terms of the environment, according to a number of recent studies. In order to completely explore the sector from an environmental aspect, prospective and consequential LCAs are required, as shown by a number of significant challenges. Given the variety of insects that may be used as sources of protein for food and feed, several studies have shown that substituting some insects for soybeans and fish meal is a possibility. Only a few of the adverse characteristics of vegetable feedstock that limit their percentage inclusion in the diet include excessive fiber and non-starch polysaccharide content, inadequate ratios of essential and non-essential amino acids, anti-nutritional components, low palatability, and low digestibility. With a long history of cultivation for food and animal feed, soybean has become a commodity crop with a variety of industrial uses, most notably in the livestock sector. In response to a shift in dietary preferences toward more animal protein, this business has grown dramatically (Oliveira & Schneider, 2016). The huge increase in soybean production and export has had considerable negative effects on the environment since it has changed the land use and land cover in Brazilian biomes both directly and indirectly (Gasparri & de Waroux, 2015). As a result, the global soybean trade is a complex human–environment interaction that may be represented as a metacoupled system. This conceptual paradigm enables concurrent and complementary interactions between remote, adjacent, and local actors (Herzberger etal., 2019). Significant GHG emissions may be produced as a result of the development and production of soybeans. However, evaluating this is challenging, and the results might be very different. The main contributing stage for the environmental consequences of this product system owing to numerous inputs and agricultural methods, notably GHG emissions, was discovered when LCA was utilized to analyze the environmental impact of soybean production. Other important sources of GHG include soil nitrous oxide emissions and changes in land use. Studies have shown that when changes in land use are taken into account, the effects of GHG emissions vary significantly (Humpenöder etal., 2013). Agriculture and land use change (LUC) accounted for 80% of CO2 equivalent emissions in Brazil in 2005. A naturally occurring GHG in the soil that is 298 times more powerful than CO2 and associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizers, agricultural waste, and LUC is nitrous oxide (Lapola etal., 2014). Figure6a, b show the countries that use soybean and mealworm meal as animal feed, respectively. Fehlenberg etal. (2017) showed that, despite the occasional local importance of other adjacent causes, deforestation in the Chaco appears to be mostly a result of the world’s expanding soybean consumption. Landis etal. (2007) confirmed that fertilizer use, crop cultivation, and nitrogen fluxes inside the farm have an impact on air emissions. Future life cycle assessments (LCAs) of corn or soybeans as feed stocks from the American Corn 29128 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Belt may exclude the contribution of seed production and irrigation, which was less than 0.002% to any of the inventory emissions or energy flows. Effect-decreasing LCAs identify the production stage (creation, use, or disposal) that is expected to have the greatest environmental effect and may suggest ways to reduce those impacts over the course of the product’s life. The most environmentally friendly alternative may be chosen with the use of comparative LCAs of potential items (Berardy etal., 2015). The heavy reliance on soybean meal in intensive ruminant production and the crop’s negative environmental effects motivate the quest for substitute, protein-rich meals. Four insects—Alphitobius diaperinus, Tenebrio molitor, Zophobas morio, and Acheta domesticus—were the subject of a study by Toral etal. (2022) to determine their potential as substitute sources of protein for ruminants. The findings suggest that the four insects under study might serve as an alternative to grains for ruminants. Novel feed components, such as insects, can totally replace soybean products, lowering greenhouse gas emissions and the need for arable land for feed production compared to typical diets designed for both chicken lines. It has also been demonstrated that switching from traditional diets to diets that include new components can Fig. 6 a and b: the geographical countries that are using soybean and mealworms as livestock feed 29135 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… Table 7 A summary of mealworms and their role in the transmission of diseases to humans and animals Animal disease caused by Mealworms Human disease caused by Mealworms Disease Pathogen Animal host Region’s distribution Reference Disease Pathogen Region’s distribution Reference Salmonellosis Salmonella spp. Animals Worldwide Jensen etal. (2020) typhoid fever Salmonella spp. Worldwide Jensen etal. (2020) Crypto Cryptosporidium spp. humans, and animals Worldwide Dixon, (2015) cryptosporidiosis Cryptosporidium spp. Worldwide García-Livia etal. (2020) Gregarine disease Gregarine spp. Molluscan The North Atlantic, and the White Sea Zakariah etal. (2019) Hymenolepiasis hymenolepis diminuta Rats Worldwide Xie etal., 2017 Hymenolepiasis hymenolepis diminuta Worldwide Panti-May etal. (2020) Listeriosis listeria monocytogenes monogastric animals Worldwide Mancini etal. (2019) Listeriosis listeria monocytogenes Worldwide Wang etal. (2017) Mastitis Staphylococcus aureus cattle, sheep, goats, and horses Worldwide Mamtimin etal. (2023) Staphylococcal Infections Staphylococcus aureus Worldwide Lozano etal. (2016) Mastitis Serratia marcescens Animals, invertebrates and plants Worldwide Ishii etal. (2014) Nosocomial infections Serratia marcescens Worldwide Kim etal. (2015) Pneumonia Rhodococcus equi horses and foals Sub-Saharan Africa Vázquez-Boland etal. (2013) Rhodococcus equi infection Rhodococcus spp. Worldwide Stewart etal. (2019) Diarrhoea E. coli Animals Worldwide Allocati etal. (2013) clinical infections E. coli Worldwide Allocati etal. (2013) Botulism Clostridium botulinum Humans, and various animals Worldwide Kooh etal. (2020) Botulism clostridium botulinum Worldwide Kooh etal. (2020) Enterotoxemia Clostridium perfringens humans and livestock Worldwide Lu etal. (2021) food poisoning Clostridium perfringens Worldwide Lu etal. (2021) 29136 S.A.Siddiqui et al. the interior tissues made roasting ineffective for killing Enterobacteriaceae on its own. This is why it was suggested that, before roasting, there be a brief blanching phase in hot water. Enterobacteriaceae were also shown to be rendered inactive by another lactic acid fermentation procedure. However, this technique did nothing more than maintain a low level of spore-forming bacteria. Although Enterobacteriaceae can be killed by heat treatment, spore-forming organisms could need a more intensive heat treatment method, such as canning. Blanching and subsequent roasting for around 10 min reduced the overall number of microorganisms on entire insects by 5 log cycles while also reducing the number of spores by 2 log cycles. Following these processes, the residual spores can be contained using the right packing and by enlisting other adjustments, such as acidity, along with cold storage (Klunder etal., 2012; Mutungi etal., 2019). Additionally, techniques such as smoking, brining, frying, steaming, boiling, roasting, toasting, and drying aid in the creation of safe goods. According to Klunder etal. (2012), in boiling samples of the house cricket (Acheta domestica) and mealworm, Enterobacteriaceae were only found in concentrations of less than 10 CFU/g. The samples underwent a brief heat treatment after being killed by boiling water, which, according to the literature, successfully eradicated the enterobacteria. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are widely distributed in nature, significant in food and biotechnology, and beneficial to human health. LAB has positive effects primarily on the gut microbiota, enhancing intestinal peristalsis and halting the development of dangerous bacteria. Additionally, they have an impact on the immune system, facilitate vitamin formation, and aid in the absorption of minerals like calcium and iron. Due to the lactic acid bacteria’s extensive availability in the environment, a sizable number of these bacteria were found in recently dead insects (Adámek etal., 2018). LAB was found in insects. Vandeweyer etal. (2015) analyzed recently deceased insects and discovered that mealworm larvae contained 2.5 × 107—1.6 × 108 CFU/g. Whereas Stoops etal. (2016) discovered mealworms to have 1.0 × 107–4.0 × 108 CFU/g. While Adámek etal. (2018) discovered 2.8 × 106CFU/g in the lesser mealworm, numerous insect species can collect biological or chemical pollutants that might be harmful or anti-nutritional. This is aided by the presence of natural habitats, feeding patterns, and human activity (such as mining and agriculture) adjacent to areas where insects may be gathered. Insects also act as hosts or vectors for illnesses that affect vertebrates and can result in life-threatening infections (Mutungi etal., 2019). As a part of their defense strategies, certain insect species release chemicals with potentially harmful effects (Dzerefos etal., 2013). In relation to mealworms, focus has been placed on benzoquinones, which adult beetles release into their stomach cavity. Benzoquinones have been shown to have hazardous consequences. The findings do not apply to mealworm larvae but rather to adult insects (beetles). Regarding the defense mechanisms of mealworm larvae, adult mealworms and other species of insects are fatally affected by acidic methanolic extracts of mealworm larvae (Turck etal., 2021). The hazards may be reduced if the insects were raised in controlled surroundings and public health issues were taken into account when choosing the substrates for raising them or when harvesting them from the wild. Post-harvest processing continues to be the sole method for addressing these safety issues because it is typically impossible to ensure the gathering of hazard-free insects (Mutungi etal., 2019). As a result, it’s essential to follow procedures that eliminate or drastically minimize the pathogens in insects in order to ensure a safe product. Although insects have some special qualities that make them an excellent candidate for use as an effective and environmentally friendly source of protein in animal production, the risks associated with them must be considered. As a result, minimizing these hazards will result in a protein substitute that is affordable, secure, and ecologically friendly (Berardy etal., 2015). 29137 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… As a result of cultivating insects in large numbers for food and feed, toxic chemicals such as heavy metals that arise from contaminated insect diets may accumulate. Testing of a range of chemical contaminants on commercial mealworms revealed levels that were either similar to or lower than those reported in beef (Poma etal., 2017). But using polluted waste streams as feed can encourage pesticide buildup (Houbraken et al., 2016). Maintaining high levels of quality assurance and hygiene in the breeding and processing of mealworms is crucial due to their high nutritional content, low cost, and environmental friendliness, and to ensure that they are free of diseases and contaminants. To reduce the risk of pathogens and toxins and provide a safe product, routine cleaning procedures and the use of clean, uncontaminated feed during mealworm reproduction can help (Berardy etal., 2015). For numerous reasons, reducing infections in mealworms is important to ensure the safety of the final product, as these dangerous microbes must be eliminated or minimized. For instance, many countries have laws governing the security of food goods, including insects meant for feed or food. To comply with these laws and guarantee that the product passes safety standards, mealworms must have fewer infections. Therefore, edible insect farming has the potential to grow into a lucrative industry that significantly increases the overall sustainability of food systems if the proper regulations are put in place and food safety standards are met. This means that as the edible insect business grows, many obstacles must be overcome. Once strict food safety regulations are put in place and entomophagy becomes more widely accepted, edible insect farming might become a profitable industry that supports the sustainability of food systems (Żuk-Gołaszewska etal., 2022). Pesticides are chemicals that are used to control a variety of pests (Choudhary etal., 2018). Despite the fact that their use is crucial for agricultural yield, their excessive use also pollutes our environment (Hashimi etal., 2020). Respiratory, integumentary, cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, and neurological issues are some of the adverse health impacts linked to the use of various pesticides. More than 2000 different pesticide poisonings due to acute causes occurred in Morocco between 2008 and 2014 (WHO, 2019). Cancer is one of the more difficult long-term impacts to directly link to pesticide usage. The eating of food containing residues beyond legal limits has effects on one’s health as well (Joko etal., 2020; Sarkar etal., 2021). Livestock feeds are frequently contaminated with pesticides by a variety of factors, including environmental pollution, insect and microbe activity, and human handling. To improve the quality and competitiveness of animal products, animal feed may also contain endogenous poisons, which are mostly the result of pesticide application. Animals are frequently given feed and fodder that contains pesticide residues, which pass through the body after consumption. These chemicals can be obtained by animals through tainted feed and water. Accordingly, because these pesticides are lipophilic, milk and other fatty foods are the main sources of their buildup (Choudhary etal., 2018). The use of pesticides has been linked to several harmful side effects in humans, animals, and birds, including the development of cancer, teratogenicity, immunosuppression, embryotoxicity, infertility, and birth abnormalities, as well as a number of other conditions, including hepatotoxicity, nephropathy, mutagenicity, and hypersensitivity (Choudhary et al., 2018). Reproductive toxicants, or endocrine disrupters are terms used to describe pesticide residues that have a negative effect on the reproductive system. By acting at several places, such as the brain, pituitary, and reproductive organs, these toxins modify or disrupt the milieu of reproductive hormones (Choudhary etal., 2018). These harmful substances are ingested by people through their environment, including the water, air, and agricultural goods. However, despite the fact that they are eliminated in various ways or retained in the tissues of both people and animals, their negative effects continue unabated. They depress every human organ, including the brain, kidneys, skin, gastrointestinal system, liver, lungs, 29138 S.A.Siddiqui et al. and spleen. They result in a variety of illnesses, tumors, mutations, and death (Hashimi etal., 2020). Pesticides can change the microbiomes of a wide range of creatures, from insects to mammals, by affecting a number of characteristics of the animal microbiome, including the taxonomic makeup of bacteria, bacterial biodiversity, and bacterial ratios. Animal immunity is reduced by the microbiome alterations brought on by pesticides. Pesticide side effects may be a global issue for pollinators. Another potential drawback of pesticides is their impact on the intestinal microbiota of bees and bumblebees, which makes the body more susceptible to pathogenic microflora and ultimately kills insects. Pesticides can also have an impact on vigor, mate choice, and offspring traits (Syromyatnikov etal., 2020). In addition, the massive spraying of pesticides severely suppresses animals, birds, and soil organisms (Hashimi etal., 2020). When agricultural chemicals are used correctly and in accordance with instructions, the adverse effects of pesticides on the environment are reduced (Choudhary etal., 2018).Due to all of these factors, it is crucial to follow all guidance and suggestions made about pesticides by the appropriate authorities in order to preserve a safe and healthy environment. 8 Conclusion In light of global challenges such as population growth, food insecurity, and environmental strains, finding sustainable protein sources is imperative. Insects, long embraced as a dietary staple in many regions, offer a promising solution due to their efficient resource utilization and nutritional value. Among these, mealworms stand out as a commercially significant option for both food and feed production. Our review underscores their potential as a cost-effective and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional livestock feed, with lower ammonia and GHGs. However, the literature highlights concerns regarding insectborne illnesses, necessitating careful management. This review has practical applications across agricultural, livestock, and environmental sectors. It offers insights into replacing soy with mealworms in livestock feed, aiding farmers in exploring environmentally friendly protein sources while meeting nutritional needs. By assessing environmental aspects like energy use and emissions, it guides policymakers and stakeholders in evaluating sustainable feed options and shaping environmental policies. Additionally, understanding the economic implications of mealworm-based feed helps decision-makers in agriculture and food industries. Mealworms, potentially sourced from organic waste, align with circular economy principles, supporting sustainable waste management. Ultimately, the review informs stakeholders about the environmental impact of adopting mealworms, fostering informed decisions for sustainable agriculture. Through a comprehensive analysis, we explored the significance of mealworms as feed sources, their nutritional profile, and their potential to replace soy in animal feed while considering environmental impacts. While mealworms offer substantial benefits, optimizing production processes remains critical to ensure affordability and safety. Recommendations include conducting additional comparative studies to understand the environmental impacts of replacing soy with mealworms in livestock feed. These studies should consider various factors such as livestock types and geographic regions for comprehensive insights. Encouraging pilot projects can assess the practicality and scalability of mealworm-based feed, while fostering dialogue among stakeholders is crucial for promoting knowledge exchange and facilitating sustainable practices. 29139 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… Acknowledging limitations, such as data variability and the review’s scope, future research should standardize methodologies and explore additional environmental factors. Long-term effects of replacing soy with mealworms on soil health and food security need monitoring. Future prospects involve investigating the nutritional quality of livestock products, technological innovations in mealworm farming, and developing policy frameworks to support mealworm-based feed integration. Addressing these recommendations, limitations, and future prospects can advance knowledge and promote the sustainable adoption of mealworm-based feed in livestock farming practices. Further research is needed to develop cost-effective and eco-friendly processing methods, facilitating the widespread adoption of mealworms as a sustainable protein source for livestock. Author contribution statement SAS—conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, resources, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualization, data curation, software, project administration, investigation, funding acquisition, supervision. WE—writing—original draft, formal analysis, visualization. IU—review, formal analysis. MH—writing—original draft, formal analysis, visualization. ZCP—methodology. BY—Review and editing. Funding Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The open access publishing fee is covered under the agreement between the DEAL Consortium and Springer and Springer Nature upon acceptance due to Shahida Anusha Siddiqui being affiliated to the Technical University of Munich. Data availability No data is available. Declarations Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. References Abdollahi, M. R., Zaefarian, F., & Ravindran, V. (2019). Maximising the benefits of pelleting diets for modern broilers. Animal Production Science, 59(11), 2023–2028. Adámek, M., Mlček, J., Adámková, A., Suchánková, J., Janalíková, M., Borkovcová, M., & Bednářová, M. (2018). Effect of different storage conditions on the microbiological characteristics of insect. Potravinarstvo Slovak Journal of Food Sciences. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5219/ 910 Adhikari, P., Aryal, N., Ghimire, A., & Khanal, P. (2021). Sustainable biowaste recycling using insects. In Clean energy and resources recovery (pp. 399–420). Elsevier. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ B978-0- 323- 85223-4. 00007-5 Allocati, N., Masulli, M., Alexeyev, M. F., & Di Ilio, C. (2013). Escherichia coli in Europe: An overview. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(12), 6235–6254. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ijerp h1012 6235 Al-Tulaihan, A. A., Najib, H., & Al-Eid, S. M. (2004). The nutritional evaluation of locally produced dried bakery waste (DBW) in the broiler diets. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition, 3(5), 294–299. 29140 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Ardoin, R., & Prinyawiwatkul, W. (2021). Consumer perceptions of insect consumption: A review of western research since 2015. International Journal of Food Science & Technology, 56(10), 4942–4958. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ ijfs. 15167 Bakshi, M. P. S., Wadhwa, M., & Makkar, H. P. (2016). Waste to worth: Vegetable wastes as animal feed. CABI Reviews, 2016, 1–26. Ballitoc, D. A., & Sun, S. (2013). Ground yellow mealworms (Tenebrio molitor L.) feed supplementation improves growth performance and carcass yield characteristics in broilers. Open Science Repository Agriculture, 18, e23050425. https:// doi. org/ 10. 7392/ opena ccess. 23050 425 Banaszkiewicz, T. (2011). Nutritional value of soybean meal. Soybean and Nutrition, 12, 1–20. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5772/ 23306 Belluco, S., Losasso, C., Maggioletti, M., Alonzi, C., Ricci, A., & Paoletti, M. G. (2015). Edible insects: A food security solution or a food safety concern? Animal Frontiers, 5(2), 25–30. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2527/ af. 2015- 0016 Berardy, A., Costello, C., & Seager, T. (2015). Life cycle assessment of soy protein isolate. In Proceedings of the international symposium on sustainable systems and technologies, Dearborn, MI, USA (Vol. 3). 10.6084/m9.figshare.1517821 Biasato, I., De Marco, M., Rotolo, L., Renna, M., Lussiana, C., Dabbou, S., & Schiavone, A. (2016). Effects of dietary Tenebrio molitor meal inclusion in free-range chickens. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 100(6), 1104–1112. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jpn. 12487 Biasato, I., Gasco, L., De Marco, M., Renna, M., Rotolo, L., Dabbou, S., …& Schiavone, A. (2017). Effects of yellow mealworm larvae (Tenebrio molitor) inclusion in diets for female broiler chickens: implications for animal health and gut histology. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 234, 253–263. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. anife edsci. 2017. 09. 014 Bordiean, A., Krzyżaniak, M., Stolarski, M. J., Czachorowski, S., & Peni, D. (2020). Will yellow mealworm become a source of safe proteins for Europe? Agriculture, 10(6), 233. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ agric ultur e1006 0233 Bovera, F., Loponte, R., Marono, S., Piccolo, G., Parisi, G., Iaconisi, V., & Nizza, A. (2016). Use of Tenebrio molitor larvae meal as protein source in broiler diet: Effect on growth performance, nutrient digestibility, and carcass and meat traits. Journal of Animal Science, 94(2), 639–647. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2527/ jas. 2015- 9201 Bovera, F., Piccolo, G., Gasco, L., Marono, S., Loponte, R., Vassalotti, G., & Nizza, A. (2015). Yellow mealworm larvae (Tenebrio molitor L.) as a possible alternative to soybean meal in broiler diets. British Poultry Science, 56(5), 569–575. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 00071 668. 2015. 10808 15 Bueno, R. D., Borges, L. L., God, P. I. G., Piovesan, N. D., Teixeira, A. I., Cruz, C. D., …& Barros, E. G. (2018). Quantification of anti-nutritional factors and their correlations with protein and oil in soybeans. Anais Da Academia Brasileira De Ciências, 90, 205–217. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1590/ 0001- 37652 01820 140465 Cassidy, E. S., West, P. C., Gerber, J. S., & Foley, J. A. (2013). Redefining agricultural yields: From tonnes to people nourished per hectare. Environmental Research Letters, 8(3), 034015. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1088/ 1748- 9326/8/ 3/ 034015 Chachaj, R., Sembratowicz, I., Krauze, M., Stępniowska, A., Rusinek-Prystupa, E., Czech, A., …& Ognik, K. (2019a). The effect of fermented soybean meal on performance, biochemical and immunological blood parameters in turkeys. Annals of Animal Science, 19(4), 1035–1049. Chachaj, R., Sembratowicz, I., Krauze, M., Stȩpniowska, A., Rusinek-Prystupa, E., Czech, A., Matusevičius, P., & Ognik, K. (2019b). The effect of fermented soybean meal on performance, and biochemical and immunological blood parameters in turkey. Annals of Animal Science, 19(4), 1035–1049. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2478/ aoas- 2019- 0040 Chah, C. C., Carlson, C. W., Semeniuk, G., Palmer, I. S., & Hesseltine, C. W. (1975). Growth-promoting effects of fermented soybeans for broilers. Poultry Science, 54(2), 600–609. Chedly, K., & Lee, S. (2000). Silage from by-products for smallholders. FAO Plant Production and Protection Papers, 85–96. Cheng, Y. H., Hsiao, F. S. H., Wen, C. M., Wu, C. Y., Dybus, A., & Yu, Y. H. (2019). Mixed fermentation of soybean meal by protease and probiotics and its effects on the growth performance and immune response in broilers. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 47(1), 339–348. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 09712 119. 2019. 16373 44 Choi, I. H. (2023). Evaluation of pelleting mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) powder with chokeberry by-product meal to improve duck production and meat quality traits. Revista Brasileira De Ciencia Avicola / Brazilian Journal of Poultry Science, 25(2), 1–6. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1590/ 1806- 9061- 2022- 1717 29141 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… Choudhary, S., Yamini, N. R., Yadav, S. K., Kamboj, M., & Sharma, A. (2018). A review: Pesticide residue: Cause of many animal health problems. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies, 6(3), 330–333. Dalton, S., & Al-Zubiedi, H. (2019). The Mealworm Farm Project: a low-cost household mealworm farm. Damron, B. L., Waldroup, P. W., & Harms, R. H. (1965). Evaluation of dried bakery products for use in broiler diets. Poultry Science, 44, 1122–1126. Degola, L., Sterna, V., Jansons, I., & Zute, S. (2019). The nutrition value of soybeans grown in Latvia for pig feeding. Agronomy Research, 17(5), 1874–1880. https:// doi. org/ 10. 15159/ AR. 19. 158 Dei, H. K. (2011). Soybean as a feed ingredient for livestock and poultry (pp. 215–226). IntechOpen. Dixon, B. R. (2015). Transmission dynamics of foodborne parasites on fresh produce. In Foodborne parasites in the food supply web (pp. 317–353). Woodhead Publishing. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/ B978-1- 78242- 332-4. 00013-8 Doi, H., Gałęcki, R., & Mulia, R. N. (2021). The merits of entomophagy in the post COVID-19 world. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 110, 849–854. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tifs. 2021. 01. 067 Dreyer, M., Hörtenhuber, S., Zollitsch, W., Jäger, H., Schaden, L. M., Gronauer, A., & Kral, I. (2021). Environmental life cycle assessment of yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) production for human consumption in Austria–a comparison of mealworm and broiler as protein source. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 26, 2232–2247. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s11367- 021- 01980-4 Dzerefos, C. M., Witkowski, E. T. F., & Toms, R. (2013). Comparative ethnoentomology of edible stinkbugs in southern Africa and sustainable management considerations. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 9(1), 1–12. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ 1746- 4269-9- 20 Engel, P., & Moran, N. A. (2013). Functional and evolutionary insights into the simple yet specific gut microbiota of the honey bee from metagenomic analysis. Gut Microbes, 4(1), 60–65. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4161/ gmic. 22517 Fehlenberg, V., Baumann, M., Gasparri, N. I., Piquer-Rodriguez, M., Gavier-Pizarro, G., & Kuemmerle, T. (2017). The role of soybean production as an underlying driver of deforestation in the South American Chaco. Global Environmental Change, 45, 24–34. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. gloen vcha. 2017. 05. 001 Feng, J., Liu, X., Xu, Z. R., Liu, Y. Y., & Lu, Y. P. (2007). Effects of Aspergillus oryzae 3.042 fermented soybean meal on growth performance and plasma biochemical parameters in broilers. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 134(3–4), 235–242. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. anife edsci. 2006. 08. 018 Finke, M., & Winn, D. (2004). Insects and related arthropods: A nutritional primer for rehabilitators. Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation, 27(3/4), 14. Gałęcki, R., & Sokół, R. (2019). A parasitological evaluation of edible insects and their role in the transmission of parasitic diseases to humans and animals. PLoS ONE, 14(7), e0219303. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 02193 03 Gałęcki, R., Bakuła, T., & Gołaszewski, J. (2023). Foodborne diseases in the edible insect industry in Europe—new challenges and old problems. Foods, 12(4), 770. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ foods 12040 770 Gałęcki, R., Michalski, M. M., Wierzchosławski, K., & Bakuła, T. (2020). Gastric canthariasis caused by invasion of mealworm beetle larvae in weaned pigs in large-scale farming. BMC Veterinary Research, 16(1), 1–7. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s12917- 020- 02657-0 García-Livia, K., Martín-Alonso, A., & Foronda, P. (2020). Diversity of Cryptosporidium spp. in wild rodents from the Canary Islands Spain. Parasites & Vectors, 13(1), 1–9. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s13071- 020- 04330-9 Garofalo, C., Osimani, A., Milanović, V., Taccari, M., Cardinali, F., Aquilanti, L., …& Clementi, F. (2017). The microbiota of marketed processed edible insects as revealed by high-throughput sequencing. Food Microbiology, 62, 15–22. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fm. 2016. 09. 012 Gasco, L., Biasato, I., Dabbou, S., Schiavone, A., & Gai, F. (2019). Animals fed insect-based diets: State-of- the-art on digestibility, performance and product quality. Animals, 9(4), 170. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ani90 40170 Gasparri, N. I., & de Waroux, Y. L. P. (2015). The coupling of South American soybean and cattle production frontiers: New challenges for conservation policy and land change science. Conservation Letters, 8(4), 290–298. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ conl. 12121 Gatta, D., Russo, C., Giuliotti, L., Mannari, C., Picciarelli, P., Lombardi, L., Giovannini, L., Ceccarelli, N., & Mariotti, L. (2013). Influence of partial replacement of soya bean meal by faba beans or peas in heavy pigs diet on meat quality, residual anti-nutritional factors and phytoestrogen content. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 67(3), 235–247. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 17450 39X. 2013. 801137 Ghaly, A. E., & Alkoaik, F. N. (2009). The yellow mealworm as a novel source of protein. American Journal of Agricultural and Biological Sciences, 4(4), 319–331. 29142 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Giamouri, E., Papadomichelakis, G., Pappas, A. C., Simitzis, P. E., Galliou, F., Paßlack, N., Zentek, J., Lasaridi, K., Fegeros, K., Manios, T., Tsiplakou, E., & Zervas, G. (2022). Μeat quality traits as affected by the dietary inclusion of food waste in finishing pigs. Sustainability (switzerland), 14(11), 1–13. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su141 16593 Godde, C. M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Mayberry, D. E., Thornton, P. K., & Herrero, M. (2021). Impacts of climate change on the livestock food supply chain; a review of the evidence. Global Food Security, 28, 100488. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. gfs. 2020. 100488 Grau, T., Vilcinskas, A., & Joop, G. (2017). Sustainable farming of the mealworm Tenebrio molitor for the production of food and feed. Zeitschrift Für Naturforschung C, 72(9–10), 337–349. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1515/ znc- 2017- 0033 Hachmeister, K. A., & Fung, D. Y. (1993). Tempeh: A mold-modified indigenous fermented food made from soybeans and/or cereal grains. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 19(3), 137–188. Hammoumi, A., Faid, M., & Amarouch, H. (1998). Characterization of fermented fish waste used in feeding trials with broilers. Process Biochemistry, 33(4), 423–427. Hansen, N. P., Johansen, M., Wiking, L., Larsen, M., Lund, P., Larsen, T., & Weisbjerg, M. R. (2021). Fava beans can substitute soybean meal and rapeseed meal as protein source in diets for lactating dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science, 104(5), 5508–5521. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3168/ jds. 2020- 19577 Hashimi, M. H., Hashimi, R., & Ryan, Q. (2020). Toxic effects of pesticides on humans, plants, animals, pollinators and beneficial organisms. Asian Plant Research Journal, 5(4), 37–47. https:// doi. org/ 10. 9734/ APRJ/ 2020/ v5i43 0114 Herzberger, A., Chung, M. G., Kapsar, K., Frank, K. A., & Liu, J. (2019). Telecoupled food trade affects pericoupled trade and intracoupled production. Sustainability, 11(10), 2908. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ su111 02908 Hirabayashi, M., Matsui, T., Yano, H., & Nakajima, T. (1998). Fermentation of soybean meal with Aspergillus usamii reduces phosphorus excretion in chicks. Poultry Science, 77(4), 552–556. Hong, J., Han, T., & Kim, Y. Y. (2020). Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor Larvae) as an alternative protein source for monogastric animal: A review. Animals, 10(11), 2068. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ ani10 112068 Hong, K. J., Lee, C. H., & Kim, S. W. (2004). Aspergillus oryzae GB-107 fermentation improves nutritional quality of food soybeans and feed soybean meals. Journal of Medicinal Food, 7(4), 430–435. Houbraken, M., Spranghers, T., De Clercq, P., Cooreman-Algoed, M., Couchement, T., De Clercq, G., & Spanoghe, P. (2016). Pesticide contamination of Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) for human consumption. Food Chemistry, 201, 264–269. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. foodc hem. 2016. 01. 097 Humpenöder, F., Schaldach, R., Cikovani, Y., & Schebek, L. (2013). Effects of land-use change on the carbon balance of 1st generation biofuels: An analysis for the European Union combining spatial modeling and LCA. Biomass and Bioenergy, 56, 166–178. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. biomb ioe. 2013. 05. 003 Hussain, I., Khan, S., Sultan, A., Chand, N., Khan, R., Alam, W., & Ahmad, N. (2017). Meal worm (Tenebrio molitor) as potential alternative source of protein supplementation in broiler. International Journal of Biosciences, 10(4), 225–262. https:// doi. org/ 10. 12692/ ijb/ 10.4. 255-8 Ibáñez, M. A., De Blas, C., Cámara, L., & Mateos, G. G. (2020). Chemical composition, protein quality and nutritive value of commercial soybean meals produced from beans from different countries: A meta-analytical study. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 267, 114531. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. anife edsci. 2020. 114531 IPCC, A. (2013). Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, 1535. Ishii, K., Adachi, T., Hara, T., Hamamoto, H., & Sekimizu, K. (2014). Identification of a Serratia marcescens virulence factor that promotes hemolymph bleeding in the silkworm, Bombyx mori. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, 117, 61–67. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jip. 2014. 02. 001 Jensen, A. N., Hansen, S. H., & Baggesen, D. L. (2020). Salmonella typhimurium level in mealworms (Tenebrio molitor) after exposure to contaminated substrate. Frontiers in Microbiology, 11, 1613. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3389/ fmicb. 2020. 01613 Jeong, Y. W. (2022). Growth performance and meat quality traits of Pekin ducks fed with different amounts of pelleted Ptecticus tenebrifer. Entomological Research, 52(7), 334–338. Jin, X. H., Heo, P. S., Hong, J. S., Kim, N. J., & Kim, Y. Y. (2016). Supplementation of dried mealworm (Tenebrio molitor larva) on growth performance, nutrient digestibility and blood profiles in weaning pigs. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 29(7), 979. https:// doi. org/ 10. 5713/ ajas. 15. 0535 Joko, T., Dewanti, N. A., & Dangiran, H. L. (2020). Pesticide poisoning and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) in Indonesian farmers. Journal of Environmental and Public Health. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1155/ 2020/ 53796 19 29143 Replacement ofsoy bymealworms forlivestock feed ‑ Acomparative… Joshi, V. K., Gupta, K., Devrajan, A., Lal, B. B., & Arya, S. P. (2000). Production and evaluation of fermented apple pomace in the feed of broilers. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 37(6), 609–612. Jung, J., Heo, A., Park, Y. W., Kim, Y. J., Koh, H., & Park, W. (2014). Gut microbiota of Tenebrio molitor and their response to environmental change. Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 24(7), 888–897. https:// doi. org/ 10. 4014/ jmb. 1405. 05016 Kassymbek, R., Iztayev, A., Balevi, T., Chomanov, U., Zhumaliyeva, G., & Shoman, A. (2023). Optimization of the extrusion process in the production of compound feeds for dairy cows. Emerging Science Journal, 7(5), 1574–1587. https:// doi. org/ 10. 28991/ ESJ- 2023- 07- 05- 08 Kairiša, D., Valdovska, A., Vircava, I., Pilvere, I., Proskina, L., Gāliņa, D., …& Mešķis, S. (2023). The effect of sodium humate feed additives in diets for holstein breed heifers. Emerging Science Journal, 7(4), 1395–1413. https:// doi. org/ 10. 28991/ ESJ- 2023- 07- 04- 023 Khan, S., Khan, R. U., Alam, W., & Sultan, A. (2017). Evaluating the nutritive profile of three insect meals and their effects to replace soya bean in broiler diet. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, 102(2), e662–e668. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1111/ jpn. 12809 Khanal, P., Pandey, D., Næss, G., Cabrita, A. R., Fonseca, A. J., Maia, M. R., & Overrein, H. (2023). Yellow mealworms (Tenebrio molitor) as an alternative animal feed source: A comprehensive characterization of nutritional values and the larval gut microbiome. Journal of Cleaner Production, 389, 136104. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. jclep ro. 2023. 136104 Kiers, J. L., Meijer, J. C., Nout, M. J. R., Rombouts, F. M., Nabuurs, M. J. A., & Van der Meulen, J. (2003). Effect of fermented soya beans on diarrhoea and feed efficiency in weaned piglets. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 95(3), 545–552. Kim, E. J., Utterback, P. L., & Parsons, C. M. (2012). Comparison of amino acid digestibility coefficients for soybean meal, canola meal, fish meal, and meat and bone meal among 3 different bioassays. Poultry Science, 91(6), 1350–1355. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3382/ ps. 2011- 01861 Kim, S. B., Jeon, Y. D., Kim, J. H., Kim, J. K., Ann, H. W., Choi, H., & Kim, J. M. (2015). Risk factors for mortality in patients with Serratia marcescens bacteremia**. Yonsei Medical Journal, 56(2), 348– 354. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3349/ ymj. 2015. 56.2. 348 King, J. S., Ceulemans, R., Albaugh, J. M., Dillen, S. Y., Domec, J. C., Fichot, R., …& Zenone, T. (2013). The challenge of lignocellulosic bioenergy in a water-limited world. BioScience, 63(2), 102–117. Klunder, H. C., Wolkers-Rooijackers, J., Korpela, J. M., & Nout, M. R. (2012). Microbiological aspects of processing and storage of edible insects. Food Control, 26(2), 628–631. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. foodc ont. 2012. 02. 013 Kokotkiewicz, A., Jaremicz, Z., & Luczkiewicz, M. (2010). Aronia plants: A review of traditional use, biological activities, and perspectives for modern medicine. Journal of Medicinal Food, 13(2), 255–269. Kooh, P., Jury, V., Laurent, S., Audiat-Perrin, F., Sanaa, M., Tesson, V., …& Boué, G. (2020). Control of biological hazards in insect processing: Application of HACCP method for yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) powders. Foods, 9(11), 1528. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ foods 91115 28 Kulling, S. E., & Rawel, H. M. (2008). Chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa)–A review on the characteristic components and potential health effects. Planta Medica, 74(13), 1625–1634. Lapola, D. M., Martinelli, L. A., Peres, C. A., Ometto, J. P., Ferreira, M. E., Nobre, C. A., …& Vieira, I. C. (2014). Pervasive transition of the Brazilian land-use system. Nature Climate Change, 4(1), 27–35. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1038/ nclim ate20 56 Li, C., Zhang, B., Zhou, H., Wang, X., Pi, X., Wang, X., Mai, K., & He, G. (2019). Beneficial influences of dietary Aspergillus awamori fermented soybean meal on oxidative homoeostasis and inflammatory response in turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.). Fish and Shellfish Immunology, 93(April), 8–16. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fsi. 2019. 07. 037 Li, L., Zhao, Z., & Liu, H. (2013). Feasibility of feeding yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor L.) in bioregenerative life support systems as a source of animal protein for humans. Acta Astronautica, 92(1), 103–109. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. actaa stro. 2012. 03. 012 Lozano, C., Gharsa, H., Ben Slama, K., Zarazaga, M., & Torres, C. (2016). Staphylococcus aureus in animals and food: methicillin resistance, prevalence and population structure. A review in the African continent. Microorganisms, 4(1), 12. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ micro organ isms4 010012 Lu, M., Yuan, B., Yan, X., Sun, Z., Lillehoj, H. S., Lee, Y., & Li, C. (2021). Clostridium perfringensinduced host-pathogen transcriptional changes in the small intestine of broiler chickens. Pathogens, 10(12), 1607. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ patho gens1 01216 07 Maciel-Vergara, G., Jensen, A. B., Lecocq, A., & Eilenberg, J. (2021). Diseases in edible insect rearing systems. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, 7(5), 621–638. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3920/ JIFF2 021. 0024 Makkar, H. P., Tran, G., Heuzé, V., & Ankers, P. (2014). State-of-the-art on use of insects as animal feed. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 197, 1–33. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. anife edsci. 2014. 07. 008 29144 S.A.Siddiqui et al. Mamtimin, T., Han, H., Khan, A., Feng, P., Zhang, Q., Ma, X., & Li, X. (2023). Gut microbiome of mealworms (Tenebrio molitor Larvae) show similar responses to polystyrene and corn straw diets. Microbiome, 11(1), 1–20. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1186/ s40168- 023- 01550-w Mancini, S., Paci, G., Ciardelli, V., Turchi, B., Pedonese, F., & Fratini, F. (2019). Listeria monocytogenes contamination of Tenebrio molitor larvae rearing substrate: Preliminary evaluations. Food Microbiology, 83, 104–108. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. fm. 2019. 05. 006 Márquez, M. C., & Ramos, P. (2007). Effect of the inclusion of food waste in pig diets on growth performance, carcass and meat quality. Animal, 1(4), 595–599. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S1751 73110 76850 00 Messina, M. (2016). Soy and health update: evaluation of the clinical and epidemiologic literature. Nutrients, 8(12), 754. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ nu812 0754 Miglietta, P. P., De Leo, F., Ruberti, M., & Massari, S. (2015). Mealworms for food: A water footprint perspective. Water, 7(11), 6190–6203. https:// doi. org/ 10. 3390/ w7116 190 Mital, B. K., & Garg, S. K. (1990). Tempeh—technology and food value. Food Reviews International, 6(2), 213–224. Morales-Ramos, J. A., Rojas, M. G., Kay, S., Shapiro-Ilan, D. I., & Tedders, W. L. (2012). Impact of adult weight, density, and age on reproduction of Tenebrio molitor (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Journal of Entomological Science, 47(3), 208–220. Mutungi, C., Irungu, F. G., Nduko, J., Mutua, F., Affognon, H., Nakimbugwe, D., & Fiaboe, K. K. M. (2019). Postharvest processes of edible insects in Africa: A review of processing methods, and the implications for nutrition, safety and new products development. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 59(2), 276–298. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 10408 398. 2017. 13653 30 Myer, R. O., Brendemuhl, J. H., & Johnson, D. D. (1999). Evaluation of dehydrated restaurant food waste products as feedstuffs for finishing pigs. Journal of Animal Science, 77(3), 685–692. https:// doi. org/ 10. 2527/ 1999. 77368 5x Naderiboroojerdi, N., & Rajabzadeh, M. (2022). The effect of replacing dried meal worm with soybean 0meal on growth performance and carcass characteristics of broiler chickens. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Research, 5(3), 634–641. Nam, Y., Jung, H., Karuppasamy, S., Lee, J. Y., Kang, K. D., Hwang, K. Y., & Suh, J. G. (2012). Antihyperlipidemic effect of soybean extract fermented by Bacillus subtilis MORI in db/db mice. Laboratory Animal Research, 28(2), 123–129. Nassar, F. S., Alsahlawi, A. M., Al-Mahaish, M. A., Abbas, A. O., Alaqil, A. A., & Kamel, N. N. (2023). Effect of dietary mealworm meal inclusion as a replacement for soybean meal on growth, physiological, and economic efficiency of broiler chickens. Advances in Animal and Veterinary Sciences, 11(2), 310–319. https:// doi. org/ 10. 17582/ journ al. aavs/ 2023/ 11.2. 310. 319 Navidshad, B., & Seifdavati, J. (2009). Effect of dietary levels of a modified meat meal on performance and small intestinal morphology of broiler chickens. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8(20). Nowak, V., Persijn, D., Rittenschober, D., & Charrondiere, U. R. (2016). Review of food composition data for edible insects. Food Chemistry, 193, 39–46. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. foodc hem. 2014. 10. 114 Ognik, K., & Krauze, M. (2016). The potential for using enzymatic assays to assess the health of turkeys. World’s Poultry Science Journal, 72(3), 535–550. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1017/ S0043 93391 60002 46 Oliveira, G. D. L., & Schneider, M. (2016). The politics of flexing soybeans: China, Brazil and global agroindustrial restructuring. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 43(1), 167–194. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 03066 150. 2014. 993625 Oonincx, D. G., & De Boer, I. J. (2012). Environmental impact of the production of mealworms as a protein source for humans–a life cycle assessment. PLoS ONE, 7(12), e51145. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 00511 45 Oonincx, D. G., Van Broekhoven, S., Van Huis, A., & van Loon, J. J. (2015). Feed conversion, survival and development, and composition of four insect species on diets composed of food by-products. PLoS ONE, 10(12), e0144601. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1371/ journ al. pone. 01446 01 Panti-May, J. A., Rodríguez-Vivas, R. I., García-Prieto, L., Servián, A., & Costa, F. (2020). Worldwide overview of human infections with Hymenolepis diminuta. Parasitology Research, 119, 1997– 2004. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1007/ s00436- 020- 06663-x Park, J. H., Lee, S. I., Kwon, W. S., Cho, S., & Kim, I. H. (2023). Health benefits of co-supplementing mealworm protein hydrolysate and cranberry fruit extract. Italian Journal of Food Science, 35(1), 1–9. https:// doi. org/ 10. 15586/ ijfs. v35i1. 2264 Patel, S., Suleria, H. A. R., & Rauf, A. (2019). Edible insects as innovative foods: Nutritional and functional assessments. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 86, 352–359. https:// doi. org/ 10. 1016/j. tifs. 2019. 02. 033