IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i4p3108-d1064077.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chemical Composition of Earthworm ( Dendrobaena veneta Rosa) Biomass Is Suitable as an Alternative Protein Source

Author

Listed:
  • Mariola Garczyńska

    (Department of the Basis of Agriculture and Waste Management, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Land Management and Environmental Protection, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, ul. Cwiklinskiej 2, 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Joanna Kostecka

    (Department of the Basis of Agriculture and Waste Management, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Land Management and Environmental Protection, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, ul. Cwiklinskiej 2, 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Grzegorz Pączka

    (Department of the Basis of Agriculture and Waste Management, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Land Management and Environmental Protection, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, ul. Cwiklinskiej 2, 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Anna Mazur-Pączka

    (Department of the Basis of Agriculture and Waste Management, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Land Management and Environmental Protection, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, ul. Cwiklinskiej 2, 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Tomasz Cebulak

    (Department of Food Technology and Human Nutrition, Institute of Food Technology and Nutrition, College of Natural Sciences, University of Rzeszow, 4 Zelwerowicza Str., 35-601 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Kevin R. Butt

    (School of Natural Sciences, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK)

Abstract

The selected chemical composition (dry matter, ash, total protein, and crude fat) of the integumentary muscles of Dendrobaena veneta were determined, plus the dry matter (DM) percentage content of 17 amino acids and the profile (%) of fatty acids. Results were compared with a more fully studied earthworm, Eisenia fetida . In addition, the composition of exogenous amino acids was compared to the WHO standard for pork, beef, and chicken eggs. Both earthworm species were grown on the same kitchen waste, and protein composition was analyzed using the same methods. Studies indicated that the muscle of D. veneta was characterized by a high level of protein (76.82% DM). A similar content of exogenous amino acids was observed in the protein of both earthworms, but for phenylalanine and isoleucine, slightly higher levels were recorded for E. fetida . More histidine, lysine, threonine, isoleucine, and arginine were found in earthworms compared with chicken egg white. Fatty acids play an essential role in balancing human or animal feed and their content determines the dietary and nutritional value of the food. Both earthworm species contained the appropriate content of saturated and unsaturated acids. In D. veneta , a higher content of arachidonic acid was found, and in E. fetida , lauric, tridecanoic, and palmitic acids were present. Future issues of food security may force us to seriously consider earthworm protein for indirect or even direct human consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Mariola Garczyńska & Joanna Kostecka & Grzegorz Pączka & Anna Mazur-Pączka & Tomasz Cebulak & Kevin R. Butt, 2023. "Chemical Composition of Earthworm ( Dendrobaena veneta Rosa) Biomass Is Suitable as an Alternative Protein Source," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-11, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3108-:d:1064077
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3108/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3108/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bonnet, Céline & Bouamra-Mechemache, Zohra & Réquillart, Vincent & Treich, Nicolas, 2020. "Viewpoint: Regulating meat consumption to improve health, the environment and animal welfare," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Grzegorz Pączka & Anna Mazur-Pączka & Mariola Garczyńska & Joanna Kostecka & Kevin R. Butt, 2020. "Effects of Vermireactor Modifications on the Welfare of Earthworms Eisenia fetida (Sav.) and Properties of Vermicomposts," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-16, October.
    3. Cecilia Conti & Annamaria Costa & Claudia Maria Balzaretti & Vincenzo Russo & Doriana Eurosia Angela Tedesco, 2018. "Survey on Food Preferences of University Students: from Tradition to New Food Customs?," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-12, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Giovanna Piracci & Emilia Lamonaca & Fabio Gaetano Santeramo & Fabio Boncinelli & Leonardo Casini, 2024. "On the willingness to pay for food sustainability labelling: A meta‐analysis," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 55(2), pages 329-345, March.
    2. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Tayyaba Alvi & Aysha Sameen & Sipper Khan & Andrey Vladimirovich Blinov & Andrey Ashotovich Nagdalian & Mohammad Mehdizadeh & Danung Nur Adli & Marleen Onwezen, 2022. "Consumer Acceptance of Alternative Proteins: A Systematic Review of Current Alternative Protein Sources and Interventions Adapted to Increase Their Acceptability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-19, November.
    3. Nils Engelbrecht & Tim-Benjamin Lembcke & Alfred Benedikt Brendel & Kilian Bizer & Lutz M. Kolbe, 2021. "The Virtual Online Supermarket: An Open-Source Research Platform for Experimental Consumer Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-25, April.
    4. Paul Fesenfeld, Lukas & Maier, Maiken & Brazzola, Nicoletta & Stolz, Niklas & Sun, Yixian & Kachi, Aya, 2023. "How information, social norms, and experience with novel meat substitutes can create positive political feedback and demand-side policy change," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    5. Bazoche, Pascale & Guinet, Nicolas & Poret, Sylvaine & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2023. "Does the provision of information increase the substitution of animal proteins with plant-based proteins? An experimental investigation into consumer choices," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    6. Abele Kuipers & Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Aldona Stalgienė & Anita Ule & Marija Klopčič, 2021. "European Dairy Farmers’ Perceptions and Responses towards Development Strategies in Years of Turbulent Market and Policy Changes," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Emmanuelle Lavaine & Philippe Majerus & Nicolas Treich, 2020. "Health, air pollution, and animal agriculture," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 101(4), pages 517-528.
    8. Annika Johanna Thies & Felicitas Schneider & Josef Efken, 2021. "The Meat We Do Not Eat. A Survey of Meat Waste in German Hospitality and Food Service Businesses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    9. Hongxu Shi & Peihua Ma & Yinchu Zeng & Jiping Sheng, 2022. "Understanding the Interaction between Regulatory Focus and Message Framing in Determining Chinese Consumers’ Attitudes toward Artificial Meat," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Jörg Rieger & Florian Freund & Frank Offermann & Inna Geibel & Alexander Gocht, 2023. "From fork to farm: Impacts of more sustainable diets in the EU‐27 on the agricultural sector," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 764-784, September.
    11. Ortega, David L. & Sun, Jiayu & Lin, Wen, 2022. "Identity labels as an instrument to reduce meat demand and encourage consumption of plant based and cultured meat alternatives in China," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    12. Evelyn Markoni & Thanh Mai Ha & Franziska Götze & Isabel Häberli & Minh Hai Ngo & Reto Martin Huwiler & Mathilde Delley & Anh Duc Nguyen & Thi Lam Bui & Nhu Thinh Le & Bao Duong Pham & Thomas A. Brunn, 2023. "Healthy or Environmentally Friendly? Meat Consumption Practices of Green Consumers in Vietnam and Switzerland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-21, July.
    13. Pablo Delgado,, 2023. "Exploring the Drivers of Spain's Nutritional Transition: From Meat Shortages to Excess (1958-1990)," Working Papers 0234, European Historical Economics Society (EHES).
    14. Dupraz, Pierre, 2021. "Policies for the ecological transition of agriculture: the livestock issue," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 101(4), January.
    15. Bellassen, Valentin & Drut, Marion & Hilal, Mohamed & Bodini, Antonio & Donati, Michele & de Labarre, Matthieu Duboys & Filipović, Jelena & Gauvrit, Lisa & Gil, José M. & Hoang, Viet & Malak-Rawlikows, 2022. "The economic, environmental and social performance of European certified food," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    16. Nicolas Treich, 2021. "Cultured Meat: Promises and Challenges," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(1), pages 33-61, May.
    17. Funke, Franziska & Mattauch, Linus & van den Bijgaart, Inge & Godfray, Charles & Hepburn, Cameron & Klenert, David & Springmann, Marco & Treich, Nicholas, 2021. "Is Meat Too Cheap? Towards Optimal Meat Taxation," INET Oxford Working Papers 2021-08, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    18. Grzegorz Pączka & Anna Mazur-Pączka & Mariola Garczyńska & Edmund Hajduk & Joanna Kostecka & Izabela Bartkowska & Kevin R. Butt, 2021. "Use of Vermicompost from Sugar Beet Pulp in Cultivation of Peas ( Pisum sativum L.)," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-11, September.
    19. Wolfgang Brozek & Christof Falkenberg, 2021. "Industrial Animal Farming and Zoonotic Risk: COVID-19 as a Gateway to Sustainable Change? A Scoping Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-30, August.
    20. Attila Gere & Ariola Harizi & Nick Bellissimo & Derek Roberts & Howard Moskowitz, 2020. "Creating a Mind Genomics Wiki for Non-Meat Analogs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-13, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3108-:d:1064077. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.