The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Protein quality of insects as potential ingredients for dog and cat foods
Open accessAbstract
Insects have been proposed as a high-quality, efficient and sustainable dietary protein source. The present study evaluated the protein quality of a selection of insect species. Insect substrates were housefly pupae, adult house cricket, yellow mealworm larvae, lesser mealworm larvae, Morio worm larvae, black soldier fly larvae and pupae, six spot roach, death's head cockroach and Argentinean cockroach. Reference substrates were poultry meat meal, fish meal and soyabean meal. Substrates were analysed for DM, N, crude fat, ash and amino acid (AA) contents and for in vitro digestibility of organic matter (OM) and N. The nutrient composition, AA scores as well as in vitro OM and N digestibility varied considerably between insect substrates. For the AA score, the first limiting AA for most substrates was the combined requirement for Met and Cys. The pupae of the housefly and black soldier fly were high in protein and had high AA scores but were less digestible than other insect substrates. The protein content and AA score of house crickets were high and similar to that of fish meal; however, in vitro N digestibility was higher. The cockroaches were relatively high in protein but the indispensable AA contents, AA scores and the in vitro digestibility values were relatively low. In addition to the indices of protein quality, other aspects such as efficiency of conversion of organic side streams, feasibility of mass-production, product safety and pet owner perception are important for future dog and cat food application of insects as alternative protein source.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The future supply of animal-derived protein for human consumption
Boland, M. J., Rae, A. N., Vereijken, J. M., Meuwissen, M. P. M., Fischer, A. R. H., van Boekel, M. A. J. S., Rutherfurd, S. M., Gruppen, H., Moughan, P. J., & Hendriks, W. H. (2013) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2012.07.002 · Cited by 524
Self-citationPlantinga, E. A., Bosch, G., & Hendriks, W. H. (2011) · British Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114511002285 · Cited by 166
Self-citation
Cited by
Gold, M., Tomberlin, J. K., Diener, S., Zurbrügg, C., & Mathys, A. (2018) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2018.10.022 · Cited by 528
Potential of microalgae as a sustainable feed ingredient for aquaculture
Nagappan, S., Das, P., AbdulQuadir, M., Thaher, M., Khan, S., Mahata, C., Al-Jabri, H., Vatland, A. K., & Kumar, G. (2021) · Journal of Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.jbiotec.2021.09.003 · Cited by 364
Insect meals in fish nutrition
Nogales‐Mérida, S., Gobbi, P., Józefiak, D., Mazurkiewicz, J., Dudek, K., Rawski, M., Kierończyk, B., & Józefiak, A. (2019) · Reviews in Aquaculture · doi:10.1111/raq.12281 · Cited by 361
Caligiani, A., Marseglia, A., Leni, G., Baldassarre, S., Maistrello, L., Dossena, A., & Sforza, S. (2018) · Food Research International · doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2017.12.012 · Cited by 348
Xiao, X., Mazza, L., Yu, Y., Cai, M., Zheng, L., Tomberlin, J. K., Yu, J., van Huis, A., Yu, Z., Fasulo, S., et al. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.122 · Cited by 198
Metadata
- Authors
- Bosch, G., Zhang, S., Oonincx, D. G. A. B., & Hendriks, W. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Nutritional Science
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2014
- Volume
- 3
- Pages
- e29-e29
- ISSN
- 2048-6790 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2128023511
- Cited by
- 304
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Protein quality of insects as potential ingredients for dog and cat foods. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/jns.2014.23
- The paper
- Bosch, G., Zhang, S., Oonincx, D. G. A. B., & Hendriks, W. H. (2014). Protein quality of insects as potential ingredients for dog and cat foods. Journal of Nutritional Science. https://doi.org/10.1017/jns.2014.23
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.