Table 5.

Studies on the inclusion of Zophobas morio larvae meal (ZM) in fish diets

Animal species	Life stage	Duration	% dietary inclusion	Main outcome	Reference
Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia)	Fingerlings	56 d	30%	Reduced digestibility of dry matter, protein and lipid of ZM-based diets compared to fishmeal digestibility	Jabir et al. (2012a)
Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia)	Fingerlings	56 d	7.5, 15, 22.5, and 30% (25, 50, 75, and 100% replacement of fishmeal)	Up to 25% of fishmeal can be replaced by ZM without any adverse effect on feed utilization and body composition	Jabir et al. (2012b)
Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia)	Fingerlings	56 d	15% (50% fishmeal replacement) + 10, 15 and 20% of mushroom stalk meal	Diet amendment with mushroom stalk meal improved fish growth performance and survival	Jabir et al. (2012c)
Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia)	Fingerlings	56 d	20%	ZM showed dry matter ADC close to the values reported for fishmeal and soybean meal for Nile tilapia	Fontes et al. (2019)
Oreochromis niloticus (Nile tilapia)	Fingerlings	84 d	15 and 30% (50 and 100% replacement of soybean meal	No negative effects on fish growth performance. Lipid content increase and protein content decrease in fish fed the 30% ZM-based diet	Alves et al. (2020)
Salmo trutta m. trutta (sea trout)	Fingerling	56 d	10% of hydrolyzed ZM (44% fishmeal replacement)	No adverse impacts on growth performance, feed utilization or gut histomorphology	Mikołajczak et al. (2020)
Sparus aurata (sea bream)	Fingerlings	100 d	5 and 10% (4.4 and 9.4% fishmeal replacement)	High survival rates. No adverse effect on feed intake, final weights, specific growth rates and FCR	Asimaki et al. (2020)