4.6 Article

Utilization of Carrot Pomace to Grow Mealworm Larvae (Tenebrio molitor)

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 16, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su13169341

关键词

mealworms; carrot pomace; sustainability

资金

  1. National Needs Graduate Fellowship Program [2017-38420-26767]
  2. California State University Agricultural Research Institute [21-03-105]
  3. National Institute of Food and Agriculture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Edible insects are a sustainable food source for the growing population. Using carrot pomace as feed for mealworm larvae can improve commercial mealworm growth efficiency. This research provides insights into utilizing commercial waste streams to enhance the growth of sustainable protein sources.
Edible insects are a sustainable food source to help feed the growing population. Mealworms (Tenebrio molitor) can survive on a variety of food wastes and alter their composition based on the feed source. Commercial carrot production produces an abundance of carotenoid-rich carrot pomace, which may be beneficial for mealworm larvae growth. This study uses an I-optimal response surface design to assess the effect of dehydrated carrot pomace concentrations (made up with wheat bran as the control) in the substrate and wet carrot pomace as the moisture source (potato and carrot as control moisture sources) in a mealworm-larvae-growing system. Using this design, statistical models were fit to determine the relationship between the substrate and moisture and dependent variables, which include mealworm larvae mortality, days to maturity, weight, protein content, fat content, moisture content, ash content, and total carotenoid content. An optimum diet was proposed, in which the best diet for improving commercial mealworm growth was found to contain 36% dehydrated carrot pomace in the substrate, with wet carrot pomace as the moisture source. This research provides an application for a commercial waste stream and provides insight to help improve the growth of a sustainable protein source.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据