+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Growth and survival of reared Cambodian field crickets (Teleogryllus testaceus) fed weeds, agricultural and food industry by-products

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          This study evaluated survival and growth of Cambodian field crickets ( Teleogryllus testaceus) during captivity when fed a set of local weed species, agricultural and food industry by-products. Wild individuals were caught at two locations in Cambodia, kept in pens and fed commercial chicken feed until the second generation off-spring hatched. First larval stage nymphs from this generation were collected and used in a 70-day feeding trial with one control treatment (chicken feed) and 12 experimental treatments (rice bran, cassava plant tops, water spinach, spent grain, residue from mungbean sprout production, and Alternanthera sessilis, Amaranthus spinosus, Commelina benghalensis, Cleome rutidosperma, Cleome viscosa, Boerhavia diffusa and Synedrela nodiflora). The crickets were kept in plastic cages and feed intake, weight and survival of crickets were recorded weekly. Overall survival did not differ between chicken feed and the experimental treatments with the exception of crickets fed B. diffusa, which had lower survival. From day 35 to day 49, survival on A. sessilis was also lower ( P<0.05) than on chicken feed. There was no difference in weight between crickets fed chicken feed, cassava tops and C. rutidosperma. However, crickets fed A. sessilis, A. spinosus and B. diffusa weighed less than those fed chicken feed already at day 21. The feed conversion rate ranged from 1.6 to 3.9 and was ≤1.9 in crickets fed chicken feed, cassava plant tops and C. rutidosperma. Thus this study shows that it is possible, using simple means, to rear Cambodian field crickets. Cassava plant tops and C. rutidosperma both have great potential as cricket feed and the other weeds, with the exception of A. sessilis, A. spinosus and B. diffusa, agricultural and food industry by-products tested, also showed potential.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          State-of-the-art on use of insects as animal feed

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Comparison of Diets for Mass-Rearing Acheta domesticus (Orthoptera: Gryllidae) as a Novelty Food, and Comparison of Food Conversion Efficiency with Values Reported for Livestock

              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Crickets Are Not a Free Lunch: Protein Capture from Scalable Organic Side-Streams via High-Density Populations of Acheta domesticus

              It has been suggested that the ecological impact of crickets as a source of dietary protein is less than conventional forms of livestock due to their comparatively efficient feed conversion and ability to consume organic side-streams. This study measured the biomass output and feed conversion ratios of house crickets (Acheta domesticus) reared on diets that varied in quality, ranging from grain-based to highly cellulosic diets. The measurements were made at a much greater population scale and density than any previously reported in the scientific literature. The biomass accumulation was strongly influenced by the quality of the diet (p 99% mortality without reaching a harvestable size. Therefore, the potential for A. domesticus to sustainably supplement the global protein supply, beyond what is currently produced via grain-fed chickens, will depend on capturing regionally scalable organic side-streams of relatively high-quality that are not currently being used for livestock production.

                Author and article information

                [ 1 ] Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Biochemistry, P.O. Box 7011, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), 75007 Uppsala, Sweden.
                [ 2 ] Center for Livestock and Agriculture Development, CelAgrid, P.O. Box 2423, Phnom Penh 3, Cambodia.
                [ 3 ] Department of Ecology, P.O. Box 7044, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), 75007 Uppsala, Sweden.
                [ 4 ] Department of Animal Nutrition and Management, P.O. Box 7024, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), 75007 Uppsala, Sweden.
                Author notes
                Journal of Insects as Food and Feed
                Wageningen Academic Publishers
                24 October 2016
                : 2
                : 4
                : 285-292
                © 2016 Wageningen Academic Publishers

                RESEARCH ARTICLE


                Comment on this article