Table 3.
Study 1 | Diet | Duration 2 (Days) of Larval Development ± SE | Percent Difference between Published Studies and Current Study 3 Data | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Control | 7:35–55 | 7:35–70 | 21:21–55 | 21:21–70 | 35:7–55 | 35:7–70 | |||
Myers et al. [14] | Cow (Dairy) Manure | 30.4 ± 0.1 | −29% | +39% | +15% | +23% | +6% | +40% | +8% |
Nguyen et al. [41] | Poultry Feed | 23.0 ± 0.6 | −2% | +65% | +43% | +50% | +34% | +66% | +35% |
Pork Liver | 22.5 ± 0.7 | +0.6% | +67% | +45% | +52% | +36% | +68% | +37% | |
Swine Manure | 34.0 ± 1.4 | −40% | +28% | +4% | +12% | −5% | +29% | −3% | |
Kitchen Waste | 23.8 ± 0.4 | −5% | +62% | +39% | +47% | +30% | +63% | +32% | |
Fruits and Vegetables | 28.7 ± 0.8 | −24% | +45% | +21% | +29% | +12% | +46% | +14% | |
Fish Offal | 26.5 ± 0.9 | −16% | +52% | +29% | +37% | +20% | +53% | +21% | |
Oonincx et al. [12] 4 | HPHF | 21 ± 1.4 | +7% | +73% | +51% | +59% | +43% | +74% | +44% |
HPLF | 33 ± 5.4 | −37% | +31% | +7% | +15% | −2% | +32% | −0.4% | |
LPHF | 37 ± 10.6 | −48% | +20% | −4% | +4% | −13% | +21% | −12% | |
LPLF | 37 ± 5.8 | −48% | +20% | −4% | +4% | −13% | +21% | −12% | |
Control | 21 ± 1.1 | +7% | +73% | +51% | +59% | +43% | +74% | +44% | |
Mean difference | −19% | +48% | +25% | +32% | +16% | +49% | +17% |
1 Each study used slightly different methods: Nguyen et al [41] conducted the experiment at 28 °C, Myers et al. [14] at 27 °C, and Oonincx et al. [12] at 28 °C. 2 Myers et al. [14] present data as mean time to complete larval development (d), Nguyen et al. [41] present data as median time (d) to reach the prepupal stage, and Oonincx et al. [12] present data as mean time (d) to collection of first prepupae. 3 Treatments are presented as Protein:Carbohydrate-Moisture. 4 HPHF: high protein, high fat, HPLF: high protein, low fat, LPHF: low protein, high fat, LPLF: low protein, low fat. Bold numbers indicate faster development in the current study.