Table 4.
Dietary insect meal inclusion and related impacts on growth performance of aquatic species in comparison with the control diet used in the different trials.
| Species | Insect Species | Insect Form | % Substitution (Ingredient) | % Insect Inclusion | Days of Feeding | Impact on Growth Performance | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atlantic salmon | Defatted HI | Larva meal | 33%, 66% and 100%(FM) | 4.91%, 9.84% and 14.75% | 114 | The FI and daily growth increased, and FCR were unaffected by the inclusion of the HI meal in the diets. | [15] |
| 85% (CP) | 60% | 56 | Small differences in the growth performance, and no effects on the FI or FCR. | [14] | |||
| Carp var Jian | Defatted HI | Larva meal | 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% (FM) | 3.5%,7%, 10.5% and14% | 56 | No differences for the growth performance. | [45] |
| Clownfish | Defatted HI | Larva meal | 25%, 50% and 75% (FM) | 20%,40% and 60% | 106 | No differences for the survival and growth performance. | [46] |
| European seabass | Defatted HI | Pre-pupa meal | 15%,30% and 45% (FM) | 6.5%, 13% and19.5% | 62 | No differences among the groups for the growth performance and feed utilization. | [17] |
| Full-fat TM | Larva meal | 25% and 50% (FM) | 25% and 50% | 70 | The TM50% inclusion level showed the lowest FW, WG, SGR, and feeding rate. | [9] | |
| Gilthead seabream | Full-fat TM | Larva meal | 33.4% and 74% (FM) | 25% and 50% | 163 | The TM25% had higher FW, SGR, WG%, PER, and lower FCR than the other diets. | [8] |
| Mandarin fish | Full-fat TM | Larva meal | 10.76%, 21.5% and 32% (FM) | 10%, 20% and 30% | 56 | The growth rates and efficiency of nutrient utilization increased up to 20% for TM levels and declined as dietary TM level increased from 20 to 30%. | [40] |
| Pacific white shrimp | Full-fat TM | Larva meal | 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% (FM) | 7.6%, 15.3%, 22.9% and 30.5% | 42 | The WG, SGR, FI, feed conversion, and survival were not affected. | [11] |
| Partially defatted HI | Larva meal | 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and 100% (FM) | 7.1%, 14.1%, 21.2%, 28.3% and 36.3% | 63 | The FW, WG, SGR, and FCR were not modified up to a 25% FM dietary replacement. | [47] | |
| Pearl Gentian grouper | Defatted TM | Larva meal | 6.25%, 12.5%, 18.75%, 25% and 31.25% (FM) | 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10% and 12.5% | 50 | Lower FW and WG rate in 6.25 TM% diet than the other diets. The FCR of fish fed on 12.5 and 18.75 TM% showed no significant differences when compared to the control diet. |
[42] |
| Rainbow trout | Partially defatted HI | Larva meal | 25%, 50% and 100% (FM) | 6.6%, 13.2% and 26.4% | 84 | The growth performance and feed utilization were positive and acceptable at all inclusion levels. | [16] |
| 25% and 50% (FM) | 20% and 40% | 78 | The survival, growth performance and FCR were not affected | [18] | |||
| Fish offal-enriched HI | Pre-pupa meal | 25% and 50% (FM) | 16.4% and 32.8% (N); 18.12% and 36.24% (E) |
56 | No significant differences for the growth performance. | [44] | |
| Partially defatted HI | Larva meal | 46% (FM) | 28.1% | 49 | No significant differences for the growth performance. | [43] | |
| Rockfish | Full-fat TM | Larva meal | 9.6, 19.9, 28.6, 38.1% (FM) | 8%,16%,24% and 32% | 56 | The WG and SGR increased with increasing dietary inclusion of TM from 0 to 16% and then tended to decrease with further increase in dietary TM levels to 32%. | [41] |
Note: HI: Hemetia illucens; TM: Tenebrio molitor; FM: fish meal; FW: final weight; FI: feed intake; FCR: feed conversion ratio; PER: protein efficiency ratio; SGR: specific growth rate; WG: weight gain.