Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
ivestock industries such as poultry, fisheries and swine are the major
sources of protein for human consumption. With the rise in human
population, the need for these protein sources has increased. As a
result, these industries are growing day by day. But they demand fast-growing
animals and good quality of feed with high levels of energy, protein, vitamins
and essential minerals to support maximum growth of these animals before
they can be sold. At present the major conventional protein source that is used
to formulate various livestock feed is fish meal which is being over-exploited
and consequently has a very high price. As a result the cost of conventional
feed incurs about 5065% of the total cost of livestock production (Banerjee
1992; Sharma and Kishan 2006). Hence, various investigations are being
carried out to find alternative non-conventional supplementary diets for these
industries so that the over-exploitation of fish meal could be checked. Such
alternatives may include insects.
According to Prez et al., (1989) and Ramos-Elorduy et al., (1988),
these insects can be used as protein sources as well as natural pigments,
vitamins or minerals. Ledger (1987) also suggested the use of the brown locust
Locustana pardalina (Walker) as human and animal food. Ramos- Elorduy et
al., (1997) found that Sphenarium histrio Gerst. contains about 77% protein
and Melanoplus mexicanus (Saussure) about 71%. Wang et al., (2007)
estimated that the Chinese grasshopper Acrida cinerea (Thunberg) had more
than 65% crude protein and established it as a potential alternative food source
for poultry. Ramos- Elorduy et al., (1988) reported that poultry birds gave
better performance when reared on insect diets.
In this context Anand et al., (2008b) did a preliminary study on the
proximate composition and mineral content of four acridid species commonly
found in India. However, further studies are needed to look for the most
suitable species throughout the world. Moreover, for a complete picture on the
27
100
Sample taken in grams
29
100
Sample taken in grams
100
Fat free sample taken in grams
Weight of ash
% Ash =
100
Weight of sample
30
Statistical analysis:
The experiments were carried out in three replicates. For completely
randomized designs all the data were statistically analyzed by one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) using S Plus (version 4.0) software. Results
were subjected to Duncans multiple range test (DMRT) to understand the
significant difference between the data within a sample group. Data are
presented as means SD.
32
Results:
Proximate composition of the selected acridid species on dry matter basis:
Proximate composition of the selected acridid species has been
tabulated in Table 1.1. The results revealed about 67-70% moisture content in
the selected acridids with the highest value of 70.46% in case of O. abruptus
(P<0.001, one-way ANOVA, DMRT). Crude protein values ranged between
59% and 66% where the highest value (65.26%) was obtained in S.
prasiniferum prasiniferum (P<0.001, one-way ANOVA, DMRT). The highest
percentage of crude fat (7.78%) was also observed in the latter species. On the
other hand rest of the other parameters showed lowest values in S.
prasiniferum
prasiniferum
(P<0.001,
one-way
ANOVA,
DMRT).
Carbohyhrate, crude fiber and nitrogen free extract (NFE) were highest in O.
abruptus (28.51%, 8.29% and 20.22% respectively), whereas the percentage
of total ash was highest (5.27%) in O. fuscovittata (P<0.001, one-way
ANOVA, DMRT).
Content of fatty acids in g/100g (%) of fat in dried acridid body tissues:
Total eight fatty acids were detected in O. abruptus (Table 1.2).
Among them myristic acid, palmitic acid and stearic acid were saturated and
rest of the five fatty acids were unsaturated. However, total six fatty acids
were detected in S. prasiniferum prasiniferum and O. fuscovittata where
myristic acid and arachidonic acid were absent in S. prasiniferum
prasiniferum and stearic acid and arachidonic acid were absent in O.
fuscovittata. It is noteworthy that all the three acridid species contained two
very important polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) i.e. linoleic acid and
linolenic acid. It is also notable that both of these PUFAs were present in quite
high amounts in all the three acridids. The content of linoleic acid was highest
in S. prasiniferum prasiniferum whereas linolenic acid was highest in O.
abruptus (P<0.001, one-way ANOVA). On the other hand the contents of both
of these fatty acids were almost similar in case of O. fuscovittata (27.25%
linoleic acid and 27.49% linolenic acid respectively).
34
Table 1.1. Proximate composition of the selected acridid species on dry matter basis
Acridid species
O. fuscovittata
69.682.09a
64.070.23b
6.480.31a
24.180.47b
7.470.09b
5.270.09b
16.710.51b
65.260.14c
7.780.06c
21.970.28a
7.010.11a
4.990.03a
14.960.28a
59.320.11a
7.150.19b
28.510.31c
8.290.13c
5.020.06a
20.220.31c
O. abruptus
70.46.86a
Note: CP = crude protein, EE = ether extract (crude fat), C = carbohydrate, CF = crude fiber, TA = total ash, NFE = nitrogen free extract.
Values with different letters within a column are significantly different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
35
9
8
mg/kg
5
4
3
2
1
0
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
*c
8
7
6
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
mg/kg
5
4
3
2
1
0
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
36
0.7
0.6
b
b
mg/kg
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
4.5
4
3.5
mg/kg
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
37
4.5
4
3.5
mg/kg
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
2.5
mg/kg
1.5
0.5
O. fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Values are means SD. Bars with different letters are significantly
different (P<0.001) using DMRT.
38
% content in
O. abruptus
% content in
S. pr. prasiniferum
% content in
O. fuscovittata
Myristic acid
0.37
----
1.12
Palmitic acid
4.55
3.50
0.97
Oleic acid
4.27
5.07
7.24
Stearic acid
1.12
1.05
----
Arachidonic acid
1.62
----
----
Eicosenoic acid
7.91
15.18
15.39
Linoleic acid
15.34
27.91
27.25
Linolenic acid
39.45
21.52
27.49
39
c
18.5
18
17.5
17
16.5
16
15.5
15
14.5
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
16
15.9
% Amino acid content
15.8
15.7
15.6
15.5
15.4
15.3
15.2
15.1
15
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
40
c
10.4
10.2
10
9.8
9.6
9.4
9.2
9
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.2
b
a
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
41
c
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
c
6.25
6.2
6.15
6.1
6.05
6
5.95
5.9
5.85
5.8
5.75
b
a
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
42
5.3
5.2
5.1
5
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
8.2
8
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7
6.8
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
43
c
1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3
1.25
1.2
1.15
1.1
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
4.2
4.15
4.1
4.05
4
3.95
3.9
3.85
3.8
3.75
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
44
c
2
% Amino acid content
1.95
1.9
1.85
1.8
1.75
1.7
1.65
1.6
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
4.5
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
45
c
5.1
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
c
8.4
% Amino acid content
8.2
8
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.2
7
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
46
c
8.4
8.3
8.2
8.1
8
7.9
7.8
7.7
7.6
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
3.16
3.14
% Amino acid content
3.12
3.1
3.08
3.06
3.04
3.02
3
2.98
2.96
2.94
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
47
c
3.5
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
c
2.55
2.5
2.45
2.4
2.35
2.3
2.25
2.2
2.15
2.1
O.abruptus
O.fuscovittata
S.pr.pr.
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
48
49
c
6
b
a
mg/100g
4
3
2
1
O. fuscovittata
O. abruptus
S.pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
c
8
mg/100g
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
O. fuscovittata
O. abruptus
S.pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
50
c
0.5
mg/100g
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O. fuscovittata
O. abruptus
S.pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
Fig 1.28. Contents of riboflavin in mg/100g of dried acridid body tissues:
mg/100g
1.5
1
0.5
O. fuscovittata O. abruptus
S.pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
Fig 1.29. Contents of niacin in mg/100g of dried acridid body tissues:
mg/100g
6.5
5.5
5
4.5
O. fuscovittata
O. abruptus
S.pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
51
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
0.7
0.6
g/100g
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
O.fuscovittata
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
2.5
g/100g
1.5
a
1
0.5
0
O.fuscovittata
O.abruptus
S. pr. pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
52
0.09
0.08
g/100g
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
O. fuscovottata
O. abruptus
S.pr.pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
0.025
g/100g
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
O. fuscovottata
O. abruptus
S.pr.pr
Note: Bars with different letters are significantly different (P<0.001) using
DMRT.
53
Discussion:
Dietary protein is one of the most important constituents in feed of
vertebrates, and fish is of no exception. In general, higher protein levels and
higher protein to energy (P/E) ratios can produce significantly better growth
and feed utilization in fish (Ali and Jauncey, 2005). Our results revealed that
the acridid grasshoppers are high in protein contents which prove this group of
insects to be a good protein supplement.
Protein is composed of mainly twenty amino acids. Yang et al., (2010)
reported that the amino acid profile of dietary protein plays crucial role for the
increase
of
protein
retention
and
flesh
quality
for
fishes
like,
Ctenopharyngodon idella. Among these, total ten amino acids are important in
fish physiology namely: arginine, histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine,
methionine, phenylalanine, threonine, tryptophan and valine (Yang et al.,
2010). The presence of all these amino acids was observed along with the
others in the selected acridids of our interest. This finding was in concert with
the report of Chen et al., (2009) where more than hundred edible insects in
China showed that they contain all the necessary amino acids. De Silva and
Anderson (1998) reported the amount of optimal need of these amino acids in
different fishes. Our results were very encouraging because they revealed that
six of the ten essential amino acids (i.e. Val, Leu, Arg, Trp, His and Thr) were
present in the acridids in more amounts than the fishes need. However, despite
having a good amount of amino acid content, reports say that some of the
edible insects are deficient in some amino acids. As for example studies on
other edible insects like Mormon cricket (Anabrus simplex) and house cricket
(Acheta domesticus) showed that they were deficient in methionine (DeFoliart
et al., 1982; Finke et al., 1985; Nakagaki et al.,1987). Similarly, as reported by
Landry et al., (1986) the essential amino acids of six lepidopteran species were
also deficient in the same amino acid. Our result corresponds with the above
stated reports as the content of methionine, cysteine and lysine were found to
be quite low (below 3%). Therefore we support the conclusion of Wang et al.,
(2007) that insects might be unsatisfactory as the only source of dietary
protein due to limiting amino acids, but would be extremely beneficial as a
supplement.
54
55
56
Conclusion:
Proximate composition of the present study reveals that the selected
acridid grasshoppers are nutritious with high protein contents. Amino acids,
fatty acids, vitamins and minerals were present in high amount. Though antinutritional factors were present but were found to be in very low amount and
within the tolerance limit. Thus it can be safely stated that acridids could be a
good alternative source of not only protein, but also important vitamins and
minerals. This proves that an effort should be made so that these grasshoppers
could be mass reared in controlled conditions in farms as a mini-livestock so
that it could supply more and more amount of nutritious alternative food for
the formulation of protein rich diet for the livestock industry; thus lowering
down the over-exploitation of fish meal.
57