Duration: 10/01/2026 to 09/30/2031

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

The core issue this project addresses is the urgent need for more sustainable food production while decreasing pollution and waste. Traditional feed sources like fishmeal and soy contribute to environmental harm (deforestation, overfishing), while up to 40% of United States food is wasted, generating harmful greenhouse gases in landfills. Our primary goal is to spur economic growth and job creation by building a resilient, insect-based industry-research network that promotes a circular economy. We aim to achieve this by optimizing insect production using agricultural waste, scientifically testing the resulting insect protein as safe and effective feed for livestock and pets, and evaluating the insect waste (frass) as a soil-boosting fertilizer. These activities directly benefit key audiences where farmers and livestock producers can gain cost-effective, eco-friendly feed and fertilizer; waste managers turn waste liabilities into valuable assets; and the public benefits from a safer, more sustainable food system. Our activities—confirming that insects efficiently convert low-value waste into safe protein and fertilizer while rigorously testing for pathogens—create a closed-loop system that leads directly to the ultimate outcome of a self-sustaining, innovative industry.

Statement of Issues and Justification

The global demand for protein and environmentally sound agricultural resources is escalating rapidly, driven by a growing population and increasing environmental concerns. All agriculture sectors are under pressure to feed 9.8 billion people by 2050 with greater efficiency and resiliency¹. Traditional protein sources for animal feed, such as fishmeal and soy, face challenges related to overfishing, deforestation, and land use competition. As current food production is projected to fall short of future demands, the meat industry faces the significant challenge of innovating to meet these needs. This task is further complicated by the decreasing availability of space and resources required to accommodate the expansion of meat production. Further, 30-40% of food produced is wasted in the United States (equivalent to $161 billion USD)².  Coupled with this, synthetic fertilizers, while effective, contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, water pollution, and soil degradation.

The Need as Indicated by Stakeholders:

The need for alternative protein sources, nutrient recycling methods, and novel biomass, while squeezing as much monetary opportunity as possible (i.e., bioeconomy and biosecurity) out of the agricultural system, is a shared priority among a diverse range of stakeholders across the agricultural, environmental, and economic sectors. This consensus is driven by specific national and regional priorities, highlighting a pressing demand for innovative solutions within the bioeconomy. Agricultural agencies and farmer associations emphasize the development of circular economy models and the reduction of agricultural waste to enhance sustainability and efficiency within the food system. For instance, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has identified sustainable agriculture and waste reduction as key strategic goals, promoting research and development in these areas³. Farmers are actively seeking cost-effective and environmentally friendly feed and fertilizer options to improve profitability and reduce their environmental footprint. Livestock producers, in particular, are pursuing renewable protein alternatives that can reduce overall costs while also not competing with human food sources. This aligns with a broader industry shift towards more resource-efficient practices, as evidenced by initiatives from organizations like the National Pork Board and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association exploring alternative feed ingredients^4,5.  Environmental protection groups and waste management entities are focused on nutrient recycling and novel approaches to valorize organic waste streams and many state-level environmental departments advocate for the reduction of food waste and the beneficial reuse of organic materials to minimize landfill dependence and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions^6,7. There is significant interest in converting what was once considered waste or byproducts into valuable resources, contributing to a more circular economy. Food industry and economic development agencies are also showing great interest in the economic opportunities presented by novel bio-based solutions. Indeed, consumer demand for sustainably produced food has significantly reinforced these priorities, with market research consistently showing a growing preference for products with a lower environmental impact and clear traceability^8,9. This strong consumer push further incentivizes the development of innovative solutions.  Insect meal derived from insects reared on food waste presents a particularly promising solution to address both animal production needs and pervasive food waste/contamination issues. This approach not only provides a sustainable protein source for animal feed, but it also offers an effective method for valorizing organic waste, transforming a liability into an asset^10,11.  The farmed insect industry is experiencing rapid growth, with over 300 startup companies globally and a projected market value of $28.54 billion by 2035¹¹. Advancing value-added products from insect production, such as insect meal, will significantly promote economic development by creating new industries, jobs, and revenue streams within the bioeconomy.

The Importance of the Work and Consequences if Not Done:

Continued reliance entirely on conventional protein sources will exacerbate environmental degradation, including biodiversity loss, water scarcity, and increased carbon footprints. For instance, soy production was linked to 794,000 hectares of deforestation and conversion in 2022 in Brazil alone¹², and the global fish farming industry is estimated to use as much as 307.0% more wild fish than previously reported for feed¹³. Further, livestock production, including feed, contributes an estimated 12-17% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions¹⁴. Beyond this, the livestock industry is highly dependent on a global supply of feed ingredients, which are inherently susceptible to a wide range of unpredictable factors. This fundamental dependency, combined with the often rapid and significant price swings in these markets, creates an ongoing and substantial economic risk for livestock producers worldwide. 

Persistence of  inefficient management of organic waste will lead to landfill expansion, methane emissions, and nutrient leakage into ecosystems. Landfills are the third largest source of human-caused methane emissions in the United States, responsible for 14.4% of methane in 2022¹⁵, and globally, waste contributes 68 million tonness of methane annually¹⁶.  Agricultural runoff also contributes significantly to nutrient pollution, with 40-80% of applied fertilizers lost to the environment annually¹⁷, leading to nearly 500 eutrophic and hypoxic "dead zones" worldwide¹⁷. Without viable, scalable solutions, the bioeconomy's potential to achieve true circularity and resilience will be significantly hampered, undermining long-term food security and environmental health¹⁸.

The Technical Feasibility of the Research:

The technical feasibility of utilizing insects as feed and fertilizer is well-established and rapidly advancing. Insect agriculture has quickly assimilated into the United States bio-economy. Insects are an attractive, sustainable alternative protein source for animal diets due to their favorable nutrient composition, low space and water requirements, and natural role in animal diets¹⁹. Research has demonstrated the ability to rear various insect species, such as black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae, an approved feed ingredient for many animals in the United States, on diverse organic waste streams, effectively converting low-value biomass into high-value protein and fat. Resulting insect meal has proven to be a nutritious and palatable feed ingredient for poultry, aquaculture, and swine. The frass (insect excrement) produced during the rearing process is a nutrient-rich organic fertilizer²⁰.

Additionally, insects are capable of bioremediating waste streams including agricultural and food waste, manure, and plastics helping to increase their economy²¹. The insect rearing industry has grown rapidly in recent years and shows great economic potential¹¹. Advances in insect farming technology, including optimized rearing conditions, automation, and processing techniques, are continuously improving efficiency and scalability. While challenges remain in optimizing specific waste stream utilization, processing for diverse applications, and large-scale economic viability, the foundational science and engineering principles are sound, indicating high technical feasibility for continued research and development. 

Still, state-of-the-art research is urgently needed to overcome barriers to adoption in commercial animal diets such as regulatory restrictions, production scale issues, and feed and food safety concerns. Efforts to explore the use, benefits, and challenges of insect-based feed ingredients are quickly being initiated throughout the United States.  The National Science Foundation has funded the Industry-University Collaborative Research Center for Insect Biomanufacturing and Innovation (NSF IUCRC CIBI), while the United States Department of Agriculture- Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) has created a “Grand Synergies Challenge” focused on this topic. Such efforts have resulted in the diversification and expansion of related research within academia, government, and industry, which in turn has resulted in this industry becoming established.  Consequently, agencies, such as the Federal Drug Administration (FDA), and the regulatory affiliate, the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), have become engaged with assuring proper implementation and use of any products generated. Because of such broad expansion of research and applications in the United States, now is the time to create a regional multi-state project to provide greater opportunities for collaboration, while maintaining a focused agenda that addresses challenges with the insect agriculture sector.

The Advantages for Doing the Work as a Multistate Effort:

Addressing the complex challenges and opportunities presented by insect-based bioeconomy solutions is ideally suited for a multistate effort. Regional variations in waste streams, climate, regulatory frameworks, and agricultural practices necessitate a collaborative approach.  A multistate effort allows for leveraging the unique expertise and infrastructure of multiple institutions across different states as well as broader data collection on insect performance, waste conversion, and product efficacy under varied environmental and operational conditions.  This multistate effort will also allow for the development and testing solutions tailored to specific regional needs and available resources and will facilitate rapid dissemination of best practices, research findings, and technological innovations among participating states and stakeholders. Finally, data will inform consistent regulatory frameworks across states, which is crucial for industry growth.  This collaborative synergy will lead to more robust, widely applicable, and impactful outcomes than isolated efforts.

This multistate effort, structured around insects reared for feed and fertilizer, will consist of collaborative partnerships among our research universities and colleges of veterinary medicine, and USDA-ARS federal laboratories. Our universities have established and robust entomology, biological sciences, biochemistry, poultry science, and fisheries and wildlife departments, existing veterinary capabilities, and demonstrated commitments to vigorous multidisciplinary approaches to R&D. Also, Texas A&M University, Indiana University-Indianapolis, and Mississippi State University are Sites within the NSF IUCRC CIBI, where Texas A&M is the Lead Site. Furthermore, USDA-ARS houses research facilities on the Mississippi State University campus and are leaders in research in poultry research, genetics and sustainable agriculture research. The USDA-ARS Stoneville, MS location houses the Warmwater Aquaculture Research Unit.  Research within the units focus on health, nutrition, and management. The USDA-ARS Southern Plains Agriculture Research Center in College Station Texas conducts cutting edge food and feed safety research and the Poultry Production and the Product Safety Research in Fayetteville, Arkansas steers research of food safety of animal and plant products. All enlist successful university partnerships through grants and agreements. 

What the Likely Impacts Will Be from Successfully Completing the Work:

We anticipate the creation of new industries and job opportunities within emerging fields like bioconversion technologies, processing, and related innovations. This could also lead to reduced feed costs for livestock producers and create new revenue streams for diversified farmers and for waste management operations.

Our efforts are ultimately expected to reduce waste sent to landfills, which will decrease harmful emissions. We also foresee a decreased reliance on unsustainable resources and synthetic products, thereby mitigating their environmental impact. This work will enhance nutrient cycling and soil health, while also allowing for diversification of supply chains, making them more resilient to global changes. Ultimately, our multistate research will contribute to a more circular and sustainable economy by fostering innovative bioconversion technologies, automation, and novel product development. 

We anticipate the Following Returns on Investment (ROIs):

• Resilient State-Federal R&D Infrastructure for developing enhanced methods for insect rearing as a feed source to increase animal production profitability and efficiency.
• Strategic planning systems in place incorporating alternative feed ingredients to increase biosecurity
• Protection of agriculture production and infrastructure
• Protection of human and animal health, and natural resources
• Technology transfer of new management methods and diagnostic products (economic ROI, job creation, and workforce training)
• Coordinated messaging for stakeholder engagement through university extension programs
• Coordinated messaging and engagement for government managers
• Recruiting industry to the United States
• Creation of jobs through the R&D process and enterprises made possible through technology transfer efforts

Related, Current and Previous Work

Several insect species are being proposed for novel agriculture and biomass.  Their mass production offers several benefits including aiding in waste/byproduct disposal and generating protein for animal feed and fat for bioenergy, creating a nearly closed-loop system. Among the key insects currently produced for food and feed are the yellow mealworm, black soldier fly, and cricket. These insects have gained approval from regulatory bodies in numerous regions, including the European Union (EU) and the United States FDA, as well as in Asia, Australia, and South America, for these applications.

Yellow mealworms (Tenebrio molitor), are being produced at tonnage levels daily in large-scale facilities globally.  Harvested yellow mealworm larvae typically contain approximately 51%% protein and 33% fat by dry weight²². These can be processed into various forms, including fresh (live) worms for animal feed in zoos and organic chicken farming, dried biomass for general animal feed, or as an ingredient for human food products²².  Black soldier fly larvae are extensively mass-produced as feed for livestock, including salmonid fish species, poultry, and swine in the United States²³. Black soldier fly larvae are highly efficient at converting a wide variety of organic wastes, such as pre- and post-consumer food waste and animal manure, into protein and fat. This bioconversion process significantly reduces the volume of waste entering landfills, thereby mitigating GHG emissions and preventing land and water pollution²⁴. A notable advantage of black soldier flies over some other insect species is their low potential for vectoring human or wildlife pathogens²⁵. Similar to yellow mealworm, black soldier flies can be produced at tonnage levels daily.

Crickets, particularly species such as the house cricket (Acheta domesticus) and tropical house cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus), have emerged as significant contenders in the insect agriculture sector, primarily for human consumption and pet food. Crickets are valued for their high protein content, essential amino acids, vitamins, and minerals²⁶. They can be reared on various agricultural byproducts, offering a sustainable protein source²⁷. In the EU, crickets have received approval as a novel food ingredient for human consumption, appearing in products such as protein bars, flours, and snacks²⁸. In the United States, while not explicitly approved by the FDA as a "novel food", crickets may be considered food if that is their intended use and if regulatory requirements and production, as with other foods, are met under appropriate food safety standards²⁹.

Insects and their products also demonstrate excellent potential for bioremediation^21,30,31. Black soldier fly larvae, in particular, appear to have the greatest likelihood of success among insects for both waste management and the subsequent production of protein and lipids. They have been successfully reared on numerous waste streams, including animal manure, food/kitchen waste, fish offal, and food processing byproducts^27,32. Studies by Oonincx et al.  on various food processing byproducts showed black soldier fly conversion efficiencies of 17-24% and nitrogen (N) efficiency of 43-55%, indicating that N was more efficiently converted to body mass than other diet components and could be efficiently removed from the food source^27,32. Black soldier fly larvae fed mixtures of dairy manure and soybean curd residue (SCR) reduced N, P, and C in the wastes by 30-70%, with the reduction rate positively correlated with the amount of SCR³³. When reared solely on dairy manure, black soldier fly larvae reduced N content by 30-50%, P content by 61-70%, and dry matter by 33-58%³⁴. However, nutritional requirements for optimal production of protein and oil from black soldier fly, particularly concerning novel substrates like plastics, have not yet been fully refined.

Overall, the environmental benefits associated with using insects to recycle wastes are substantial and could be further amplified through optimization. Furthermore, translating research on using other wastes such as plastic amendments to commercially produce insect biomass would significantly decrease humanity's global footprint by reducing pollution and plastics accumulation in landfills. Notably, both yellow mealworm and black soldier fly present no known harm to the environment or people, as they are not noxious and can even suppress pathogens in organic waste^35-37. However, ongoing research continues to address any lingering concerns regarding their potential to harbor pathogens.

These mass-produced insects are also known to be suitable feed for livestock. Black soldier flies are already approved for use as fish, poultry, and swine feed in the United States. For instance, black soldier fly larvae can be used as feed for a variety of fish, including trout³⁸, catfish³⁹, and tilapia³⁹, and could represent a 25 to 50% replacement of current feed used in the aquaculture industry³⁸. If protein is extracted directly from the black soldier fly and utilized as a feed ingredient, the replacement could be much greater. The development of such a resource would reduce the impact of overfishing international waters and the associated fuel used to produce fishmeal, while creating jobs through the continued development of a new industry (insect farming). These benefits, along with the potential for fertilizer, biochar, and biodiesel production, suggest that viable commercial products can be gained from waste degradation through insect-derived remediation.

Despite the significant potential of insect farming, several challenges still impede efficient widespread mass production and economic viability. High production costs currently make insect meal less competitive than traditional protein sources like fishmeal or soybean meal⁴⁰, and overly optimistic early projections have led to investor skepticism and financial difficulties for some companies. Addressing these issues will require extensive automation and mechanization, including robotic harvesting, automated feeding, and real-time monitoring, to reduce labor costs and improve efficiency^41,42. Furthermore, while insects can consume various waste streams and byproducts, current reliance on high-quality agricultural by-products inflates costs⁴⁰; therefore, research is essential to refine insect nutritional requirements using diverse low-value waste streams, such as food processing byproducts and agricultural residues, to lower input costs⁴³. Advances in genomics and genetic engineering can also facilitate selective breeding for improved growth rates, feed efficiency, disease resistance, and adaptability, thereby boosting yields.

Another critical challenge is navigating the complex and often inconsistent regulatory frameworks for insect-based products, particularly for human consumption. There is a pressing need for clearer, harmonized, and science-based regulations developed through ongoing dialogue among stakeholders, ensuring product safety without stifling innovation. Robust scientific data on the safety, nutritional value, and environmental impact of mass-reared insects is crucial to inform and expedite regulatory approvals. Additionally, intensive rearing environments pose significant biosecurity risks, as disease outbreaks can devastate colonies⁴⁴. Mitigating these risks requires robust biosecurity measures, including strict cleaning protocols, quarantine for new batches, and continuous health monitoring⁴⁵. Increased research into insect pathology and breeding programs for enhanced disease resistance are vital for maintaining healthy and productive colonies.

Finally, scaling up production from laboratory to industrial (i.e., commercial) levels presents challenges in maintaining consistent environmental conditions and managing large insect populations^46,47. Developing modular, automated rearing systems with precise environmental control, feeding, and harvesting can significantly improve consistency and efficiency. Data-driven farm management, utilizing real-time monitoring, AI, and digital twin simulations, can optimize production parameters and predict growth, enabling informed decision-making for large-scale operations. Innovative technologies, such as "suspended animation" for black soldier fly neonates, can also streamline the supply chain by separating complex breeding stages from standardized rearing. Overcoming these challenges necessitates continued investment in research and development, robust collaboration across the value chain and supportive regulatory environments to solidify insect agriculture's role as a sustainable protein source and waste management solution.

How the Proposed Work Supplements and Extends Current Work:

Our proposed work will build upon these foundational studies by addressing critical gaps and extending current knowledge in several key areas. While existing research has demonstrated the potential black soldier flies, crickets and mealworms, there is a need for:

Regional Waste Stream Specificity: Deeper investigation into the optimal utilization of diverse, regionally abundant organic waste streams (e.g., specific agricultural residues, food processing byproducts unique to certain states, possibly manure or other substrates of limited or no value) and their impact on insect growth and product quality. This extends general substrate optimization to practical, localized applications.

Long-term Efficacy and Economic Models: More comprehensive, long-term feeding trials across a wider range of livestock species (e.g., sheep, goat, freshwater fish) and production systems to fully understand the sustained impact of insect meal on animal health and productivity. Concurrently, developing robust economic models that account for regional variations in waste availability, processing costs, and market demand for insect products.

Advanced Frass Applications: Exploring advanced applications of insect frass, including its potential for soil amendment for nutrients or recovering soil health in specific agricultural systems, development of specialized organic fertilizers, and its role in carbon sequestration. This moves beyond basic characterization to practical, value-added products.

Integrated Biorefinery Concepts: Investigating the integration of insect farming into broader biorefinery concepts, where multiple valuable products (e.g., chitin, fatty acids, antimicrobial peptides, essential amino acids, vitamins, minerals) are extracted from insect biomass, maximizing resource utilization and economic returns.

Regulatory Framework Development: Actively engaging with regulatory bodies to inform the development of harmonized and enabling policies for insect-derived products, facilitating their market adoption.

Related Multistate Research Projects or Other Multistate Activities:

This proposed research aligns with and will seek to collaborate with existing or emerging multistate initiatives focused on sustainable agriculture, waste management, and alternative protein development. For instance, projects under the North Central Extension and Research Activity (NCERA) or Southern Extension and Research Activity (SERA) committees, particularly those addressing livestock nutrition, nutrient management, and bioenergy from waste, provide a natural framework for collaboration. Previous multistate efforts on valorizing agricultural byproducts (e.g., corn stover, poultry litter, dairy manure, beef manure, swine manure) have laid the groundwork for understanding the complexities of regional resource utilization. This project will specifically seek to establish formal linkages with relevant research and extension networks to leverage existing expertise, share data, and disseminate findings effectively, ensuring a coordinated approach to developing and implementing insect-based solutions for the bioeconomy.

Objectives

1. Optimize insect production
   
2. Assess insects as feed for livestock, poultry, aquaculture, and pets
   
3. Identify the potential of insect frass to serve as a soil amendment, biostimulant, and improve the sustainability of crop production
   
4. Identify pathogens, and their impact, associated with insects mass produced and their feedstocks and resulting products
   
5. Spur economic growth and job creation by strengthening the links between key sectors and attracting new industries to the United States
   
6. Engage stakeholders within the network, including project sponsors, team leads, and end-users, ensuring all are consistently informed and up-to-date on project activities, milestones, and outcomes
   Comments: These objectives are highly interconnected and can work together to create a cohesive and sustainable multistate network. The synergy lies in the fact that the output of one objective becomes the input for another, ultimately leading to economic growth. The core of this synergy is the concept of a circular economy. This system minimizes waste by turning byproducts into new resources. In this context, objectives 1, 2, and 3 are directly linked, where insect production creates valuable products including insects and frass that can then be tested as protein for livestock, poultry, aquaculture and pets, and frass as soil amendment for crop production. All of these create a closed-loop system that reduces reliance on traditional, resource-intensive feeds like soy and fishmeal, as well as synthetic fertilizers. Furthermore, all of our objectives are mutually supportive of the overarching goal of economic growth. By creating a new, sustainable industry, new jobs will be created. The production of insects for feed and frass is a direct value-added process that attracts new businesses and creates new markets for these products. The regenerative agriculture aspect will attract stakeholders, driving the industry forward. Finally, a focus on identifying pathogens (Objective 4), is critical for the success of all other objectives. Ensuring the safety of mass-produced insects and their byproducts (feed and frass) is paramount for market acceptance and regulatory approval. Without robust biosecurity measures, the industry cannot grow or attract the necessary investment for economic growth and consumer acceptance. The research will build consumer confidence and provide the data needed to establish safety standards for the entire supply chain. This in turn will support the commercialization of new products, thereby attracting new industries to the United States. This research requires a multifaceted and collaborative approach due to the interconnectedness of its objectives. Single projects will inherently be multidisciplinary, spanning multistate research teams to address the complex challenges. For example, a single project might involve entomologists to optimize insect production, animal scientists to evaluate feed efficacy, and soil microbiologists and computational biologists to assess frass applications. This collaborative model is essential to ensure that each project contributes to the overarching goal of building a sustainable and economically viable insect-based industry.

Methods

Objective 1: Optimize Insect Production

Research groups from universities, such as but not limited to, Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University in Prairie View (HBU), Kentucky State University (HBU), University of California, Riverside, University of California, Davis, Clemson University, Mississippi State University, University of Nebraska, University of Rhode Island, University of Arkansas, and the Michigan State University  will  develop a planned research program for the next five years.

Examples of Hypotheses to be Explored:

Hypothesis 1: Macronutrient (e.g., protein, fat) manipulation will not impact black soldier fly production.

Hypothesis 2: Macronutrient (e.g., protein, fat) manipulation will not impact black soldier fly bioconversion of waste to insect biomass.

Hypothesis 3: Micronutrients (e.g., vitamins, metals, amino acids) manipulation will not impact black soldier fly production.

Hypothesis 4: Micronutrients (e.g., vitamins, metals, amino acids) manipulation will not impact black soldier fly bioconversion of waste to insect biomass.

Assess the development of insects on identified substrates of limited to no value or an economic burden on agricultural systems presently.          

Using the black soldier fly as an example, methods already in existence will be put into practice for consistency across locations as well as using these collaborations as an opportunity to refine them. It is important to note that while only the black soldier fly is being presented here, the group will also make great strides to include individuals that work with other systems, such as cricket and mealworm and conduct broad investigations across substrates.

Methods for this experiment will be based on prior work examining dairy manure reduction by the black soldier fly and production of insect biomass⁴⁸. Hatched larvae will be placed on 50 g of an identified substrate (e.g., manure) in 1-L containers (~10,000 larvae per container) and allowed to feed for four days prior to use in the industrial-scale experiment. Four replicates, 26-L containers (common size of batch system approach for production used by industry) will be used to conduct the experiment. The experiment will be conducted a minimum of two times (eight total replicates across two trials). Each container will be inoculated with 10,000 larvae. Larvae will be provided with 8 kg of the targeted substrate. During the experiment, daily larval weights will be measured. At peak weight (i.e., typically when larvae are harvested) within a given replicate, all larvae will be harvested, and percent survival determined. Each replicate will generate ~1.0 kg of BSF larvae/replicate container⁴⁸. Remaining larvae will be shipped frozen and on dry ice to an Analytical Laboratory for nutrition (e.g., protein, fat- value to biodiesel production) and chemical analysis (e.g., nitrogen and phosphorus).

Objective 2: Assess insects as feed for livestock, poultry, aquaculture, and pets

Research will be conducted at (but not limited to) Mississippi State, University of Arkansas, Texas A&M, and USDA by aquaculture, poultry, dairy, and entomology scientists, depending on the feed trial.

Assessing the nutritional profile of the insect-based ingredients

The experimental insect ingredients obtained from Objective 1, and by-products from insect production (e.g., chitin, insect oil, antimicrobial peptides and frass) will be analyzed for proximate composition (i.e., dry-matter, crude protein, crude lipid, and ash), and if appropriate, for amino acid and/or fatty acid profiles, gross energy, following the AOAC procedures (2005)⁴⁹. Gross energy will be measured through combustion under an oxygen saturated environment, using an adiabatic bomb calorimeter. Samples for fatty acid will be determined after cold extracting the lipid using the chloroform:methanol method⁵⁰. The lipid droplet will be stored in polypropylene tubes filled with nitrogen prior to analyzing the fatty acid profile by the fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) method using Gas Chromatography (GC). The mineral panel of the ingredients will be determined by the inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Characterization of the nutritional profile of insect frass will be used in Objective 3 for crop production studies. This step will generate descriptive data needed for the following feeding trials.

Digestibility feeding trials

The digestibility of the insect-derived ingredients will be determined using the indirect method by the supplementation of an inert marker (e.g., yttrium, titanium, ferric, or chromium oxide). Experimental feeds will be manufactured for swine, fish and shellfish, poultry and companion animals using formulations to meet their nutritional requirements. The reference diet will comprise standard feed formulation, similar to a commercial feed for the respective species, and the test diet will include the experimental ingredient at the best ratio to determine digestibility (i.e., 100% reference diet - % test ingredient). After an appropriate amount of time acclimating the animals to these experimental diets, fecal material will be collected with established procedures optimized to each species, and samples will be freeze dried and analyzed for nutrient composition, and energy as previously described. A subset of feed and fecal samples will be subjected to ICP-MS to measure the indirect marker and assess the apparent digestibility coefficients (ADCs) for nutrients and energy.

Physical parameters of experimental feed, and comparative feeding trials

After establishing ADCs for nutrients and energy, the insect-based ingredients will be evaluated in feeding trials to assess the optimal replacement levels for the different animal models. Established ingredients found in commercial diets for the different species will be analyzed for their nutritional profile and cost. Experimental diets will be formulated to be isonitrogenous and isoenergetic, with insect-based products gradually replacing established feedstuffs (e.g., fishmeal, soybean meal, animal protein concentrates, poultry by-product meal, etc.).

The inclusion of alternative ingredients can affect the physical properties of the feed pellets after extrusion. Therefore, for animal models such as dogs, cats, fish and shrimp, each experimental diet will be manufactured at least three separate extruded batches. The experimental extruded pellets will be used to evaluate the bulk density, pellet expansion, pellet durability index, pellet floatability (for finfish), water stability, and water absorption and solubility indices, and sinking velocity (for finfish and shrimp)^51-53. 

For nursery piglets in Phase I diets, fishmeal will be replaced with insect-derived proteins to assess palatability, growth, and diarrhea incidence⁵⁴.  For poultry, swine, fish and shrimp, production performance, feed efficiency, carcass yield, and survival will be evaluated.  For species such as poultry, fish, shrimp and swine, intestinal (e.g., expression of inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines, tight junction proteins, etc.) and serum/plasma (e.g., lysozyme, alanine and aspartate transferase, etc.) samples will be collected to assess the health of the animal models when offered the experimental diets. For fish and shrimp, the protein conversion efficiency (PCE) will be estimated by homogenizing the whole-fish or -shrimp samples, and analyzing these samples for whole-body proximate composition and determining the amount of protein offered throughout the feeding trial.

Research hypothesis: Insect-based ingredients can replace conventional protein ingredients in feeds for terrestrial and aquatic animal species at species-specific optimal inclusion levels without compromising feed manufacturing quality, palatability, growth performance, feed efficiency, survival, carcass yield, intestinal integrity, systemic health, or protein retention.

Quality and sensory evaluation of fish fillet, shrimp, and chicken and pork meat

For the same animals, a sub-sample from each experimental unit will be humanely euthanized with procedures established and approved by the IACUC. The products collected will be assessed for quality and shelf life, and also scored by untrained panelists provided with blinded samples. For the quality attributes, fish fillets, shrimp, and chicken and pork meat will be refrigerated at 4°C, and shelf-life of the different samples will be collected over time. The samples will be analyzed for color, expressed for lightness, redness, and yellowness indices, following the guidelines from the CIELab system⁵⁵, and pH, water holding capacity, texture will be analyzed as described by Moutinho et al. (2024)⁵⁶.

Research hypothesis: Replacing conventional ingredients with insect-based ingredients will not adversely affect the quality, shelf life, or sensory acceptance of animal products.

Palatability study for companion animals

Healthy dogs or cats will be offered the best diet identified in the comparative feeding trial with their respective control. A two-bowl study will be conducted with the appropriate number of animals, where the feed will be presented simultaneously for 15-30 min, and offered until apparent satiation. Intake ratio will be measured and the experimental feed will be offered for 10 days⁵⁷.

Research hypothesis: The best-performing insect-based diet identified during the comparative feeding trial will have palatability and voluntary intake comparable to the conventional control diet when offered to healthy dogs or cats.

DNA extraction of experimental diets and fecal/digesta

After the end of the feeding trial to compute production performance, and sample collection, the remaining animals will be fed their respective experimental diets for an additional week, and fecal/digesta samples will be collected, and an aliquot of the sample will be mixed at 1:1 ratio with sterile PBS with glycerol to provide a final 20% glycerol solution and store frozen at -80°C. The fecal samples and the experimental diets will be subjected to DNA extraction using established procedures^58,59. The samples stored in glycerol and the feed samples will be serial diluted in sterile phosphate buffer saline (PBS), and streaked in appropriate agar media to analyze the viable culturable microorganisms. After the presentation of colony forming units (CFU), these samples will be washed with sterile PBS and also subjected to DNA extraction. These samples will be sequenced and used in Objective 4 for monitoring the viability of potential pathogens that could be carried from the insect-derived ingredients to the experimental feeds, and to the animals.  Microbiome analyses will also be conducted among digesta samples.

Research hypothesis: Properly processed insect-derived ingredients will not introduce viable pathogenic microorganisms into experimental feeds or promote their persistence in the gastrointestinal tract of animals

Statistical analysis:

Data from the digestibility and feeding trials will be analyzed for normality of model residuals using the Shapiro–Wilk test and for homogeneity of variances using the Brown–Forsythe test. When these assumptions are met, data will be subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). When a significant treatment effect is detected (P < 0.05), means will be separated using Tukey’s honestly significant difference test. If residuals are not normally distributed and cannot be adequately normalized through data transformation, data will be analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Dunn’s multiple-comparison test with an appropriate adjustment for multiple comparisons, such as the Holm correction.

For studies evaluating graded replacement levels of conventional ingredients with insect-derived products, treatment responses will also be analyzed using regression procedures. Orthogonal polynomial contrasts will be used to determine whether responses exhibit linear, quadratic, or higher-order trends across increasing inclusion levels. The most appropriate regression model will be selected based on the significance of the polynomial terms, model fit statistics, biological plausibility, and parsimony. A lack-of-fit test will be performed to determine whether the selected model adequately represents the observed response. When appropriate, broken-line or nonlinear regression models will also be evaluated to estimate the inclusion level that maximizes or maintains the response variable.

Objective 3:  Identify the potential of insect frass to serve as a soil amendment, biostimulant, and improve the sustainability of crop production.

Researchers from (but not limited to) USDA, University of California, University of Arkansas, and Mississippi State University will work with industry partners to develop a comprehensive research plan over the next five years.  For instance, the USDA-ARS Poultry Production and Product Safety Research (PPPSRU) unit in Fayetteville, AR, lead a large-scale, multi-disciplinary project with over 50 scientists across the United States to synergistically advance insect meal for inclusion in animal diets – the Model for INsect Inclusion (MINIStock) Grand Challenge for Sustainable Agriculture. In collaboration with industry partners, 1862 and 1890 United States land grant universities, and education and extension professionals, this research team is helping to advance insect protein and frass production in North America, facilitating frass use in both conventional and organic agricultural systems.

This comprehensive, multi-institutional research project will work with researchers and industry partners to promote insect frass as a sustainable, value-added soil amendment and biostimulant. The central goal is to address the current lack of agronomic data on frass—a by-product rich in nutrients and chitin/chitosan—to enhance its utilization, increase return on investment for insect and crop producers, and support sustainable agriculture. The researchers and industry partners will work together to develop a five year plan, that will include (but not be limited to) the following major objectives:

The project will determine the impact of feedstock on frass properties by characterizing mass-produced Black Soldier Fly (BSF) components (frass, exuviae, adults, and frass-derived chitin) from industrial partners through detailed physiochemical and pathogen analysis at the USDA ARS and Mississippi State University, among others, depending on the components and experimental design. Concurrently, the team will investigate how new agri-industrial waste streams, processed through both industrial batch-rearing and small-scale, decentralized on-farm steady-state systems, alter frass properties and productivity, sharing results with industry.

Second, the research will rigorously compare soil and crop health when treated with frass against conventional poultry litter, synthetic NPK fertilizer, and unamended controls using standardized field and greenhouse experiments. This will involve 1) Assessing nutrient release dynamics and fertilizer replacement value through pot trials using test crops, biomass and tissue nutrient profiling, and microbial activity analysis (e.g., glomalin, urease, phosphatase, β-glucosidase). Field trials will apply frass at varying N rates (50%, 100%, 150%) to corn or another regionally important crop to measure crop growth, yield, quality, and nutrient use efficiency. 2) Quantifying the impacts of frass on soil health by measuring nutrient status, C storage, CO₂​ and N₂​O efflux, water retention, and microbial/nematode communities, with overall soil health assessed using the Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF). Furthermore, the project will specifically assess the role of frass-derived chitosan—extracted via a sequential chemical process—in enhancing plant defense responses by quantifying molecular indicators like pathogen-related (PR) gene expression (RT-qPCR for systemic acquired resistance), hypersensitive response (HR) via electrolyte leakage assays and pathogen infiltration, and key phytohormone levels (SA, JA, ethylene) using HPLC-MS/MS. Soil microbiome analysis will complement this by sequencing the 16S rRNA and ITS regions via Illumina MiSeq, processing data with QIIME2, and using PERMANOVA and correlation analyses to link microbial shifts with soil chemistry and crop performance.

Third, the Frass Initiative will be established as an online, centralized, AI-queryable data hub that integrates Big Data from the soil-frass-plant nexus—including frass composition, crop response, abiotic stress resistance, and environmental impacts—from all project partners and existing federal/university sources. This platform, which will employ the Ashworth et al. (2023)⁶⁰ hubs and spokes methodology, aims to advance data storage technology for circular production systems, provide decision support tools, and develop a cloud-based network for end-users to access and interrogate data ("off ramp"), ultimately reducing barriers to adopting sustainable frass-based nutrient sources. Final project data will also be used to conduct a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of insects as feed and fertilizer to transfer lessons learned to the agricultural community.

Objective 4: Identify pathogens, and their impact, associated with insects mass produced and their feedstocks and resulting product.

Research Hypothesis: Pathogens in mass-produced insects are primarily driven by the microbial load of their feedstocks, and while these pathogens significantly reduce insect biomass yield, they can be mitigated through biological or thermal controls to ensure the safety of the final product.

Pathogen identification in mass-produced insects and their products is crucial for safety and sustainability. This objective will use a multi-faceted approach involving microbial analysis of the insects themselves, their feedstocks, and the resulting products, including frass, among others. The impact of these pathogens can then be assessed through controlled experiments and risk assessments. These experiments will be conducted either at individual universities, or in collaboration across microbiologists, computational biologists and animal, soil and plant scientists at Mississippi State, USDA, Texas A&M, and University of Arkansas, among others, over the next five years.

Representative samples from each stage of the production cycle will be collected: Feedstocks, insects (e.g., larvae, pupae, adults), and final products (e.g., frass, processed insect meal). For each sample type, a variety of microbiological and molecular techniques will be employed. Traditional culture-based methods will be used to quantify indicator microorganisms like E. coli, Salmonella, and Listeria monocytogenes. In parallel, quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR) will be utilized for the rapid and sensitive detection and quantification of specific pathogens.  This will allow for the identification of pathogens that may not be culturable on standard media. Additionally, next-generation sequencing of the microbial communities (metagenomics) and their expressed genes (metatranscriptomics), proteins (proteomics) and metabolites (targeted metabolomics) will be performed to provide a comprehensive profile of all microorganisms present, including unculturable and novel pathogens, and to monitor shifts in the microbiome and virulence (among other functional responses) due to different feedstocks or processing methods.

If and when pathogens are identified, their potential impact will be assessed through a structured risk analysis that will involve categorizing pathogens by their potential to cause disease in the insect colonies themselves, humans, animals, or plants. The impact of the identified pathogens on the insect colony itself will be monitored by observing parameters such as larval mortality rates, growth performance, and reproductive success. For pathogens with a potential to impact crops, controlled greenhouse and field studies will be conducted. Here, frass from an infected colony will be applied to a test crop to monitor for the presence of plant diseases, comparing against a control group with pathogen-free frass.  This will allow for a direct evaluation of the pathogenicity and transmission risk. The survival and proliferation of pathogens in the frass will also be measured over time to determine if the composting or drying processes are sufficient for inactivation.

Finally, experiments will involve developing and validating mitigation strategies. This will include testing different feedstock treatments, such as heat sterilization or fermentation, to reduce the initial pathogen load. The effectiveness of different processing methods for the final products, such as heat treatment (pasteurization) or controlled drying, will be evaluated for their ability to eliminate or reduce pathogens to safe levels. Researchers will also explore the potential of the insect's own immune system and gut microbiota to suppress pathogens. By introducing beneficial microbes, or probiotics, into the feedstock, researchers will investigate if a healthy insect microbiome can serve as a natural defense mechanism against the colonization and transmission of harmful pathogens.

Objective 5: Spur economic growth and job creation by strengthening the links between key sectors and attracting new industries to the United States

Agriculture economists within our multistate group will work with industry partners to perform a comprehensive economic analysis to measure economic feasibility for various scales of insect farming operations, considering regional input costs and market prices. This will allow for policy recommendations and best practice guidelines for regulatory bodies and industry stakeholders to facilitate the safe and sustainable development of the insect bioeconomy.  Researchers will also identify industries that have high growth potential, strong existing foundations, and significant job-creation multipliers. These data will also allow us to foster collaboration. Industry stakeholders, academia across the multistate project, and members of the North American Coalition for Insect Agriculture (NACIA) will work together to engage and identify industries that have high growth potential, strong existing foundations, and significant job-creation multipliers. This group will consider and engage not only agriculture and human/pet food industries, but also  advanced manufacturing, clean energy, biotechnology, and technology, which are all critical drivers of the modern United States economy. This group will also work to support local suppliers of substrates and other raw materials.

In addition to attracting new industries and improving infrastructure, a crucial method for fostering economic growth is to strengthen the ties between academia and industry through targeted workforce development initiatives. The approach in this objective will establish formal programs that facilitate student internships, co-ops, and apprenticeships within key industry sectors, and also encourage industry professionals to participate in academic settings, for example, by serving as guest lecturers, mentors, visiting scientists or adjunct professors, as applicable. By allowing professionals to train within academic settings, companies can not only benefit from the latest research and innovation but also gain early access to a pool of highly skilled future employees. This symbiotic relationship ensures that academic curricula remain relevant to the demands of the modern workforce while providing students with invaluable real-world experience, ultimately creating a more fluid and responsive talent pipeline.

Researchers and other stakeholders in this objective will also work together to determine the scientific research needed to inform a robust regulatory framework. To do this, a consortium of academic institutions among the multistate project as well as industry partners will be established to execute a series of targeted research projects that address: 1. Safety and Nutritional Profiling alongside projects outlined in objectives 1-4; 2.Lifecycle and Environmental Impact, and 3. Health and risk assessments on various substrates and end users through projects outlined in objectives 1-4. We propose NACIA will serve as the primary liaison between academia, industry and with government agencies.

Objective 6: Engage stakeholders within the network, including project sponsors, team leads, and end-users, ensuring all are consistently informed and up-to-date on project activities, milestones, and outcomes

We will engage a diverse network of stakeholders in the insect agriculture sector, which will include farmers/growers (both as frass end-users and insect producers), the industry (insect and feed/fertilizer manufacturers, and regulatory bodies), researchers (from academic and government institutions like USDA-ARS), and other stakeholders (consumers, extension professionals, and policy makers). Engagement will begin with a kick-off meeting to explicitly identify and categorize all network members, followed by the implementation of a multifaceted communication strategy centered on a centralized communication hub (dedicated website/other online platforms) for timely updates, milestones, and final outcomes. Consistent information flow will be maintained through regular, scheduled communication, such as quarterly reports and monthly summaries, complemented by annual in-person or virtual workshops/meetings to foster deeper dialogue, technical data presentation, and direct feedback, thereby ensuring the entire network remains informed and up-to-date on project progress and validated results.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

Milestones

(1):Begin soliciting additional participants in currently underrepresented geographies such as the Western United States

(1):Advertise to build team (including all stakeholders) and gain expertise

(1):Set up file sharing and storage (Google Drive/One Drive, etc)

(1):Have initial executive meeting to discuss project as a whole as well as individual work plans to identify Executive Committee and Subcommittee Leadership with Subcommittee follow-up for individual workplans. This will allow us to define collaborations and roles, formalize commitments, agree on statements of work, and address questions of logistics early on.

(1):Establish publishing policies across multistate group

Projected Participation

View Participation Form/Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

The project's outreach strategy is multi-faceted, aiming to disseminate actionable results to diverse stakeholders, including agricultural producers, industry professionals, policymakers, researchers, and the general public, with a focus on accessibility and inclusivity. Key scientific findings on insect production, feed efficacy, frass application, and pathogen management will be published in high-impact peer-reviewed journals (e.g., Journal of Animal Science). For immediate practical application, practical guides, extension bulletins, and white papers will be developed in collaboration with university extension and industry groups. We will organize regular, hands-on workshops, webinars, and on-farm field days across participating states, making special efforts to host events in locations accessible to underserved and underrepresented farming communities. Project findings will be presented at national and international scientific conferences (e.g., Entomological Society of America) to engage the broader research community. A dedicated project website will serve as the central repository for all data and materials, supported by social media campaigns and videos to reach a wider audience. To inform policy, concise policy briefs will be prepared for legislative and regulatory agencies, and regular meetings will be held with industry and environmental groups. Critically, we will actively partner with community-based organizations and agricultural cooperatives to provide information and training in culturally appropriate formats and languages for small-scale farmers, promoting equitable access. Finally, the project team will participate in relevant multistate research and extension committees and pursue collaborative projects (e.g., with USDA-ARS) to maximize the work's impact and reach.

Organization/Governance

The technical committee for this multistate project will operate under a standard governance structure, ensuring efficient coordination, transparent decision-making, and effective execution of research objectives.

Executive Committee:

A core Executive Committee will be formed, consisting of the Project Director and a representative from each of the primary research objectives (e.g., one lead for "Optimize insect production," one for "Assess insects as feed," etc.). This committee will be responsible for overall project oversight, strategic planning, resource allocation, and ensuring alignment with project goals and milestones. Its functions will include reviewing progress reports, resolving inter-objective challenges, and serving as the primary liaison with funding agencies and external stakeholders. Leadership of the executive committee will be selected by a simple majority vote among its members, with the Project Director serving a two-year term, renewable once.

Subcommittees:

To address the specific functions outlined in the objectives, several subcommittees will be established. Each subcommittee will be led by a designated expert from a participating institution/subject matter and will comprise researchers actively involved in that particular objective. Examples include: Production Optimization Subcommittee: Focusing on Objective 1, including substrate research and rearing protocols. Feed Assessment Subcommittee: Addressing Objective 2, responsible for feeding trials and nutritional analyses. Frass Application Subcommittee: Dedicated to Objective 3, covering soil amendment and biostimulant research. Biosecurity and Safety Subcommittee: Overseeing Objective 4, including pathogen identification and mitigation. Economic and Policy Integration Subcommittee: Focusing on Objective 5, developing economic models and policy recommendations. These subcommittees will be responsible for designing experimental protocols, collecting and analyzing data, and preparing technical reports for the Executive Committee.

Program Coordinators/Managers:

A dedicated Program Coordinator will be responsible for day-to-day project management, facilitating communication among committee members, organizing meetings and workshops, managing data sharing platforms, and assisting with report preparation. This role will ensure smooth operational flow and timely completion of tasks. 

Decision-Making Process:

Decision-making within the technical committee will primarily be by consensus. For critical decisions that cannot be reached by consensus, a simple majority vote among the Executive Committee members will be employed. All decisions will be documented and communicated transparently to all participating researchers. Annual meetings of the full technical committee will be held to review overall progress, discuss future directions, and foster collaborative opportunities.

Literature Cited

1          in The Causes and Impacts of Neglected Tropical and Zoonotic Diseases: Opportunities for Integrated Intervention Strategies  The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health   (2011).

2          USDA. Food Waste FAQs, <https://www.usda.gov/about-food/food-safety/food-loss-and-waste/food-waste-faqs#:~:text=In%20the%20United%20States%2C%20food%20waste%20is,of%20waste%20has%20far%2Dreaching%20impacts%20on%20society:> (2025).

3          Agriculture, U. S. D. o. USDA Strategic Plan FY 2022-2026. (2022).

4          Board, N. P. Effectiveness of Shallow Burial with Carbon with Low-Quality Carbon Material. (Pork Checkoff, 2024).

5          Research, C. o. C. f. t. F. o. A. S. et al. Critical Role of Animal Science Research in Food Security and Sustainability.  (National Academies Press, 2015).

6          Kenny, S. Estimating the Cost of Food Waste to American Consumers. (2025).

7          Agency, U. S. E. P. Regional Resources to Reduce and Divert Wasted Food Across the United States, <https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-management-food/regional-resources-reduce-and-divert-wasted-food-across-united-states> (2025).

8          Jin, S., Cao, Y., Jones, G., Li, W. & Frewer, L. J. Consumers’ purchase intentions towards traced foods: A comparative analysis between the United Kingdom and China. Food Control 152, 109828 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2023.109828

9          Tran, D., De Steur, H., Gellynck, X., Papadakis, A. & Schouteten, J. J. The heterogeneity of consumer preference for blockchain-based food traceability: The role of governmental trust and information-seeking behaviour. Food Quality and Preference 126, 105424 (2025). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2024.105424

10        van Huis, A. & Oonincx, D. G. A. B. The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 37, 43 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0452-8

11        Gnana Moorthy Eswaran, U., Karunanithi, S., Gupta, R. K., Rout, S. & Srivastav, P. P. Edible insects as emerging food products-processing and product development perspective. J Food Sci Technol 60, 2105-2120 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-022-05489-y

12        Pereira, O. & Bernasconi, P. Brazilian soy exports and deforestation. (

trase, 2025).

13        Roberts, S., Jacquet, J., Majluf, P. & Hayek, M. N. Feeding global aquaculture. Sci Adv 10, eadn9698 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adn9698

14        Bellarby, J. et al. Livestock greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation potential in Europe. Glob Chang Biol 19, 3-18 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2486.2012.02786.x

15        Agency, E. P. Basic Information about Landfill Gas <https://www.epa.gov/lmop/basic-information-about-landfill-gas#methane> (2024).

16        IEA. Methane Tracker 2020. (IEA, Paris, 2020).

17        Crosby, G.  Vol. 2025   (USDA, 2016).

18        Thomchick, E., Jacobson, M. & Ruamsook, K. Bioeconomy bright spots, challenges, and key factors going forward: Perceptions of bioeconomy stakeholders. EFB Bioeconomy Journal 4, 100068 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioeco.2024.100068

19        Madau, F. A., Arru, B., Furesi, R. & Pulina, P. Insect Farming for Feed and Food Production from a Circular Business Model Perspective. Sustainability 12, 5418 (2020).

20        Surendra, K. C. et al. Rethinking organic wastes bioconversion: Evaluating the potential of the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens (L.)) (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) (BSF). Waste Management 117, 58-80 (2020). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2020.07.050

21        Siddiqui, S. A. et al. Bioconversion of organic waste by insects – A comprehensive review. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 187, 1-25 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2024.04.122

22        Zhao, X., Vázquez-Gutiérrez, J. L., Johansson, D. P., Landberg, R. & Langton, M. Yellow Mealworm Protein for Food Purposes - Extraction and Functional Properties. PLoS One 11, e0147791 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0147791

23        Officials, A. o. A. F. c. AFCO Annual Meeting Agenda and Committee Reports. (Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, 2016).

24        Beskin, K. V. et al. Larval digestion of different manure types by the black soldier fly (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) impacts associated volatile emissions. Waste Manag 74, 213-220 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.01.019

25        Gold, M., Tomberlin, J. K., Diener, S., Zurbrügg, C. & Mathys, A. Decomposition of biowaste macronutrients, microbes, and chemicals in black soldier fly larval treatment: A review. Waste Manag 82, 302-318 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.10.022

26        Rumpold, B. A. & Schlüter, O. K. Nutritional composition and safety aspects of edible insects. Mol Nutr Food Res 57, 802-823 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201200735

27        Oonincx, D., van Broekhoven, S., van Huis, A. & van Loon, J. J. A. Feed Conversion, Survival and Development, and Composition of Four Insect Species on Diets Composed of Food By-Products. Plos One 10, 20 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144601

28        EFSA Panel on Nutrition, N. F. a. F. A. N. et al. Safety of Acheta domesticus powder as a Novel food pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/2283. EFSA Journal22, e8919 (2024).

29        Larouche, J. et al. The edible insect sector in Canada and the United States. Anim Front 13, 16-25 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1093/af/vfad047

30        Ewuim, S. Entomoremediation-A Novel In-Situ Bioremediation Approach. Animal Research International 10, 1681-1684 (2013).

31        de Vries, G. E. Insect enzymes for bioremediation. Trends Plant Sci 5, 9 (2000).

32        Nguyen, T. T. X., Tomberlin, J. K. & Vanlaerhoven, S. Ability of Black Soldier Fly (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) Larvae to Recycle Food Waste. Environmental Entomology 44, 406-410 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/nvv002

33        ur Rehman, K. et al. Conversion of mixtures of dairy manure and soybean curd residue by black soldier fly larave (Hermetia illucens L.). Journal of Cleaner Production 154, 366-373 (2017).

34        Myers, H. M., Tomberlin, J. K., Lambert, B. D. & Kattes, D. Development of black soldier fly (Diptera : Stratiomyidae) larvae fed dairy manure. Environmental Entomology 37, 11-15 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225x(2008)37[11:dobsfd]2.0.co;2

35        Huang, Y. et al. Dual oxidase gene <em>Duox</em> and Toll-like receptor 3 gene <em>TLR3</em> in the Toll pathway suppress zoonotic pathogens through regulating the intestinal bacterial community homeostasis in <em>Hermetia illucens</em> L. bioRxiv, 844696 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1101/844696

36        Liu, Q., Tomberlin, J. K., Brady, J. A., Sanford, M. R. & Yu, Z. Black soldier fly (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) larvae reduce Escherichia coli in dairy manure. Environmental Entomology 37, 1525-1530 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1603/0046-225x-37.6.1525

37        Tomberlin, J. K. & Huis, A. v. Black soldier fly from pest to ‘crown jewel’ of the insects as feed industry: an historical perspective. Journal of Insects as Food and Feed 6, 1-4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3920/jiff2020.0003

38        St. Hilaire, S. et al. Fly prepupae as a feedstuff for rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 38, 59-67 (2007).

39        Bondari, K. & Sheppard, D. C. Soldier fly Hermetia illucens L., as feed for channel catfish,Ictalurus punctatus (Rafinesque), and blue tilapia,Oreochromis aureus (Steindachner). Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 18, 209-220 (1987).

40        van Huis, A. Potential of insects as food and feed in assuring food security. Annu Rev Entomol 58, 563-583 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153704

41        Tanga, C. M. et al. Edible insect farming as an emerging and profitable enterprise in East Africa. Current Opinion in Insect Science 48, 64-71 (2021). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2021.09.007

42        Ibitoye, O. et al. Advancing urban insect farming: integrating automation, vertical farming, and sustainable waste management systems. Discover Agriculture 3, 37 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-025-00194-8

43        Dewangan, B. et al. Reassuring insect farming ensures waste minimization and future food security. Discover Sustainability 6, 451 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-025-01266-x

44        Bertola, M. & Mutinelli, F. A Systematic Review on Viruses in Mass-Reared Edible Insect Species. Viruses 13 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3390/v13112280

45        Lecocq, A. & Jensen, A. B. Review: Insect diseases in mass production systems: Risks, prevention, diagnostics and management. animal, 101559 (2025). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2025.101559

46        Yang, F. & Tomberlin, J. K. Comparing Selected Life-History Traits of Black Soldier Fly (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) Larvae Produced in Industrial and Bench-Top-Sized Containers. Journal of Insect Science 20 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/ieaa113

47        van Huis, A. Edible insects: Challenges and prospects. Entomological Research 52, 161-177 (2022).

48        Miranda, C. D., Cammack, J. A. & Tomberlin, J. K. Mass Production of the Black Soldier Fly, Hermetia illucens (L.), (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) Reared on Three Manure Types. Animals (Basel) 10 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10071243

49        AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. Association of Official Analysis Chemists International. (2005).

50        Folch, J., Lees, M. & Sloane Stanley, G. H. A simple method for the isolation and purification of total lipides from animal tissues. J Biol Chem 226, 497-509 (1957).

51        Umar, S., Kamarudin, M. S. & Ramezani-Fard, E. Physical properties of extruded aquafeed with a combination of sago and tapioca starches at different moisture contents. Animal Feed Science and Technology 183, 51-55 (2013). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2013.03.009

52        Kamarudin, M. S., de Cruz, C. R., Saad, C. R., Romano, N. & Ramezani-Fard, E. Effects of extruder die head temperature and pre-gelatinized taro and broken rice flour level on physical properties of floating fish pellets. Animal Feed Science and Technology 236, 122-130 (2018). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2017.12.007

53        Farias, A. B. d. S. et al. Feeding a high-density pellet improves the size homogeneity of juvenile tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum). Animal Feed Science and Technology 325, 116355 (2025). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2025.116355

54        Deng, Z., Duarte, M. E., Jang, K. B. & Kim, S. W. Soy protein concentrate replacing animal protein supplements and its impacts on intestinal immune status, intestinal oxidative stress status, nutrient digestibility, mucosa-associated microbiota, and growth performance of nursery pigs. J Anim Sci 100 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac255

55        CIE Recommendations on Uniform Color Spaces, Color-Difference Equations, and Metric Color Terms. Color Research & Application 2, 5-6 (1977). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1520-6378.1977.tb00102.x

56        Moutinho, S. et al. Effects of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae oil on fillet quality and nutritional traits of gilthead seabream. Aquaculture 579, 740219 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2023.740219

57        Aldrich, G. C. & Koppel, K. Pet Food Palatability Evaluation: A Review of Standard Assay Techniques and Interpretation of Results with a Primary Focus on Limitations. Animals (Basel) 5, 43-55 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani5010043

58        Older, C. E. et al. Comparison of high-throughput sequencing methods for bacterial microbiota profiling in catfish aquaculture. North American Journal of Aquaculture 86, 39-54 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/naaq.10309

59        Yamamoto, F. Y. et al. Exploring the nutritional value of corn fermented protein as a replacement for soybean meal in diets for juvenile channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus): Impacts on production performance, intestinal health, and disease resistance. Aquaculture 587, 740824 (2024). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2024.740824

60        Ashworth, A. J. et al. Framework to develop an open-source forage data network to improve primary productivity and enhance system resiliency. Agronomy Journal 115, 3062-3073 (2023). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21441

 

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

MS

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions