Hubbry Logo
Insects as feedInsects as feedMain
Open search
Insects as feed
Community hub
Insects as feed
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Insects as feed
Insects as feed
Insects as feed
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Black soldier fly larvae produced as animal feed

Insects as feed are insect species used as animal feed, either for livestock, including aquaculture, or as pet food.

As livestock feed production uses ~33% of the world's agricultural cropland use, insects might be able to supplement livestock feed. They can transform low-value organic wastes, are nutritious and have low environmental impacts.[1]

Utility

[edit]

Due to their nutritional profile, especially the high protein content, various types of insects can be used as feed for industrial animal production and aquaculture. An insect-based diet for farm animals has been scientifically investigated for pigs, poultry and edible fish. Insects can provide as much protein and essential amino acids for swine and poultry that can potentially replace soybean meal in a diet.[2] Inclusion of black soldier fly larvae in a diet for fish farming gave positive effect with no difference in odor and texture.[3] At the same time, there are challenges and disadvantages compared to established feed in terms of performance and growth. For monogastric farm animals, such as swine and poultry, replacing their conventional formula entirely with insects can result to decrease in performance and growth e.g., because insect flour may contain high levels of ash.[4] However other research suggests that animals fed insect protein from black-soldier flies, achieved faster growth rates and better-quality meat than with soya or fishmeal.[5] Insects as feed are legally considered farm animals themselves, therefore they must not receive feed from ruminant proteins, kitchen and food waste, meat and bone meal and liquid manure.

With a view to protecting the environment and resources as well as feed and food security in the face of a growing world population, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has called for increased use of feed insects for feed production.[6]

Insect species with potential as feed

[edit]

Black-soldier flies, common house fly larvae and mealworms are some of the most common insects in animal feed production. Black soldier flies and common house flies often reside in manure piles and in organic wastes. Farming these insects could promote better manure and organic waste management, while providing nutritious feed ingredient to pets and livestock.[7]

Aside from nutritional composition and digestibility, insects are also selected for ease of rearing by the producer. A study compared insect species regarding their suitability as feed material, investigating their development time, survival rate, efficiency of converting base feed into insect biomass (FCR), dry matter conversion rate (ECI), and nitrogen efficiency (N-ECI).[8] In the table, values indicate the mean ± one standard deviation, and superscripts indicate significant differences.

Sample Size n Diet Survival rate Development time (days) FCR ECI N-ECI
Argentinian Cockroach 6 HPHF 80±17.9a 200±28.8c 1.7±0.24c 21±3.0b 58±8.3b
6 HPLF 47±16.3b 294±33.5a 2.3±0.35ab 16±2.7bc 51±8.7b
6 LPHF 53±13.2ab 266±29.3ab 1.5±0.19c 30±3.9a 87±11.4a
6 LPLF 51±12.2ab 237±14.9bc 1.7±0.15bc 18±1.9bc 66±6.7b
6 Control 75±21.7ab 211±18.7c 2.7±0.47a 14±2.1c 52±8.1b
Black Soldier Fly 6 HPHF 86±18.0 21±1.4c 1.4±0.12 24±1.5 51±3.2
6 HPLF 77±19.8 33±5.4ab 1.9±0.20 20±1.3 51±32.5
6 LPHF 72±12.9 37±10.6a 2.3±0.56 18±4.8 55±14.6
5 LPLF 74±23.5 37±5.8a 2.6±0.85 17±5.0 43±12.8
6 Control 75±31.0 21±1.1bc 1.8±0.71 23±5.3 52±12.2
Yellow Meal Worm 6 HPHF 79±7.0ab 116±5.2def 3.8±0.63c 12±2.7cdef 29±6.7cde
6 HPLF 67±12.3bc 144±13.0cd 4.1±0.25c 10±1.0def 22±2.3e
6 LPHF 19±7.3e 191±21.9ab 5.3±0.81c 8±0.8ef 28±2.8de
6 LPLF 52±9.2cd 227±26.9a 6.1±0.62c 7±1.0f 23±3.1de
6 Control 1 84±9.9ab 145±9.3cd 4.8±0.14c 9±0.2def 28±0.6cde
6 Control 2 34±15.0de 151±7.8bcd 4.1±0.49c 11±1.5cdef 31±4.2cde
6 HPHF-C 88±5.4ab 88±5.1f 4.5±0.17c 19±1.6ab 45±4.5b
6 HPLF-C 82±6.4ab 83±6.5f 5.8±0.48c 15±0.9bc 35±2.2bcd
6 LPHF-C 15±7.4e 135±17.3cde 19.1±5.93a 13±2.7cde 45±9.2ab
6 LPLF-C 80±5.6ab 164±32.9bc 10.9±0.61b 13±1.4cde 41±4.6bc
6 Control 1-C 93±9.3a 91±8.5f 5.5±0.49c 14±3.3bcd 45±2.4b
6 Control 2-C 88±3.1ab E95±8.0ef 5.0±0.48c 21±2.6a 58±7.3a
House cricket 6 HPHF 27±19.0ab 55±7.3c 4.5±2.84 8±4.9 23±13.4b
1 HPLF 6 117 10 3 -
3 LPHF 7±3.1b 167±4.4a 6.1±1.75 5±1.3 -
2 LPLF 11±1.4b 121±2.8b 3.2±0.69 9±2.2 -
6 Control 55±11.2a 48±2.3c 2.3±0.57 12±3.2 41±10.8a

HPHF = high protein, high fat; HPLF = high protein, low fat; LPHF = low protein, high fat; LPLF = low protein, low fat, C= carrot supplementation

Insects as feed in aquaculture

[edit]

In the European Union, the use of seven insect species as feed in aquaculture has been permitted since July 1, 2017:[9]

The inclusion of black soldier flies in the feed of farmed fish had positive results and showed no differences in taste or texture of the fish.[4]

Environment and sustainability

[edit]

As global populations rise, food demand is becoming an increasingly important issue. Raising conventional livestock requires resources such as land and water. As a result, the ability to meet the needs of the growing population may require alternative sources of quality protein.[10]

Insects also have the ability to feed on organic waste products such as vegetable, restaurant and animal waste, therefore reducing the amount of excess food produced by humans.[11] Insects are efficient at converting feed into protein.[7]

Challenges

[edit]

According to two researchers, the "scaling up of production depends on whether cheap organic wastes can be safely used and easily biotransformed into high-quality insect products and whether legislative frameworks are conducive to this approach".[1]

Further challenges include "automation of production techniques, optimization of bioconversion by an efficient interaction between microbes in the insect gut and feed substrate, disease management, making use of the short life cycle of insects to select efficient strains of insects and microbes for certain diets, food safety issues, and processing" as well as "safety of using waste to avoid any pathogen transmission".[1]

Regulation

[edit]

The use of insects in feed in the European Union was previously prohibited under an act called "TSE Regulation" (Article 7 and Annex IV of Regulation 999/2001) that bans the use of animal protein in animal feed. In July 2017 this regulation was revised and partially lifts the ban on animal proteins, allowing insects to be included in fish feed.

This was coupled with another change that reclassified insects in the European Union (EU) catalogue of feed materials. This change specifically references to insect fats and insects proteins instead of classifying them under a broad title of animal products. Due to this change, producers now must list the species and life stage of the insect on their product.[12]

In 2021, the EU authorized insect-derived processed animal proteins in poultry and pig feed.[1]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Insects as feed

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Insects as feed refers to the rearing and processing of select insect species, such as black soldier fly larvae (), yellow mealworms (Tenebrio molitor), and house crickets (Acheta domesticus), into defatted meals, full-fat products, and extracted oils used as protein and lipid sources in formulations for , , , and pet nutrition. These insects provide high-quality nutrition, with dry matter crude protein levels often between 40% and 50%, balanced profiles comparable to fishmeal, and lauric acid-rich fats offering benefits. The approach gains traction as a means to address protein shortages in animal diets amid rising global demand, leveraging ' ability to convert low-value organic substrates like food waste into with feed conversion ratios superior to those of conventional . Empirical data support applications in and , where partial substitution of or fishmeal maintains or enhances growth performance, though full replacement often requires supplementation for optimal results. Sustainability claims emphasize lower and demands relative to soy cultivation or marine harvesting, yet recent analyses reveal that large-scale production can yield higher per unit protein—up to 13.5 times those of soy—due to energy-intensive rearing conditions and substrate dependencies. The sector faces economic hurdles, with meals currently priced above competitive alternatives, limiting scalability beyond niche markets. Regulatory progress, including approvals for feed in the , underpins market growth projected from USD 1.34 billion in 2025 to USD 2.4 billion by 2030, driven by aquaculture's needs. Key challenges persist in standardizing rearing protocols to minimize variability in nutrient composition and contaminants, alongside debates over insect welfare in systems.

Historical Development

Traditional and Early Modern Uses

In various regions of , particularly , indigenous communities have long incorporated into poultry diets as a natural protein source, with smallholder farmers employing traditional methods such as placing containers filled with or bran near termite mounds to capture swarming alates during seasonal flights. This practice, documented among farmers in countries like and , predates 20th-century industrialization and served as an accessible feed option in areas lacking commercial protein alternatives. In , silkworm pupae (), a byproduct of , have historically been utilized as feed for and fish, with records of their application in East and Southeast Asian extending back centuries before mechanized . These pupae were often processed into meal substitutes for fishmeal in and rations, leveraging the abundance from silk production in regions like and . Early 20th-century uses remained anecdotal and localized, such as opportunistic feeding of larvae to during wartime feed shortages in , though systematic documentation is sparse due to reliance on conventional grains and forages. These practices were constrained by manual collection methods and the absence of industrialized rearing, limiting scalability and integration into broader agricultural systems until later scientific interventions.

Scientific Research and Initial Trials (1970s–2000s)

In the 1970s and 1980s, initial experiments focused on (Musca domestica) larvae, or s, as a potential replacement for fishmeal in animal feeds, driven by the need for cost-effective protein sources amid rising conventional feed prices. Early trials, such as those evaluating meal in diets, demonstrated that partial substitutions (up to 100% of fishmeal at 9% dietary inclusion) supported growth without pathological effects, though long-term performance data remained limited. These studies reported protein digestibility in the range of 60-70% for larvae when replacing fishmeal, highlighting efficient nutrient utilization but noting variability due to substrate quality and processing methods. Pioneering work also tested black soldier fly () larvae in feeds; a 1981 study found them viable for production, establishing feasibility without quantifying feed conversion ratios (FCR). By the , research shifted toward black soldier fly larvae for , with university-led trials emphasizing their role in converting organic substrates like manure into high-protein . A 1994 experiment reared larvae on laying hen manure, yielding 42% crude protein and 35% fat content, with effective reduction of fly pests and waste volume, suggesting potential for integrated feed production systems. These larvae exhibited FCRs around 2:1 when reared on manure-based diets, outperforming soy-based feeds (typically 3:1 FCR) in efficiency, though direct animal performance trials showed inconsistent long-term gains in like and due to antinutritional factors such as . FAO-supported explorations in the late further documented insect larvae's promise for sustainable feed, but highlighted data gaps in scalability and consistent digestibility across livestock, limiting broader adoption. Into the 2000s, controlled trials refined these findings, such as 2005 studies on and manure substrates producing larvae with 42-43% protein, enabling full fishmeal substitution (25% dietary level) in without impairing growth rates or nutrient utilization. Protein digestibility reached 76.6% in some evaluations, comparable to conventional proteins, yet challenges persisted in uniform larval composition and extended animal health outcomes, underscoring the need for standardized rearing protocols before commercial viability. Overall, these decades' empirical work established insects' nutritional equivalence to traditional feeds in short-term settings but revealed gaps in long-term efficacy data, influenced by variable rearing conditions and limited peer-reviewed replication.

Commercial Expansion (2010s–Present)

The commercialization of as gained momentum in the amid rising sustainability concerns and regulatory advancements in . In July 2017, the authorized processed animal proteins (PAPs) from for use in , enabling broader industrial applications previously restricted under the total ban on animal-by-product feeds since 2001. This followed earlier authorizations for specific uses, such as in , and spurred startups to scale production. Protix, founded in 2009 in the , exemplifies this shift, expanding to a facility in that, by 2019, produced over 100,000 tons of insect biomass annually, primarily black soldier fly larvae for and feeds. Global market growth reflected these developments, driven by demand for alternatives to conventional proteins amid fishmeal supply constraints. The protein market, largely oriented toward feed applications, was valued at USD 483.1 million in 2023 and is projected to reach USD 1.51 billion by 2030, expanding at a (CAGR) of 16.9%. Fishmeal shortages, exacerbated by aquaculture's rapid expansion and of stocks, have accelerated adoption; projections indicate potential fishmeal deficits as early as 2028, prompting feed trials incorporating up to 20-30% insect meal in and diets without compromising growth performance. Despite this trajectory, challenges persist in achieving cost-competitiveness and full-scale viability. In 2025, InnovaFeed paused operations at its North American Insect Innovation Center in —its first U.S. facility, established in partnership with ADM—citing funding difficulties and an 18-month operational halt after initial testing. This underscores economic hurdles, including high for biorefineries and volatile input prices, even as European plants like InnovaFeed's Nesle site ramped production fivefold since 2022. Empirical data from trials indicate viable substitution rates, but widespread adoption hinges on sustained regulatory support and price parity with soy or fishmeal, projected to improve with technological refinements yielding 17-18% CAGR in select segments.

Nutritional Profile

Macronutrients, Micronutrients, and Bioactive Compounds

Insects used as feed typically exhibit a macronutrient profile dominated by protein and lipids on a dry matter basis, with crude protein content ranging from 40% to 70% depending on species, developmental stage, and rearing substrate. For instance, black soldier fly larvae (Hermetia illucens) average approximately 42% crude protein, while values can reach 55-76% in other farmed species like crickets and mealworms. Lipid content generally falls between 10% and 30%, comprising saturated and unsaturated fatty acids, including polyunsaturated varieties that vary with the insect's diet. Chitin, a structural polysaccharide in insect exoskeletons, constitutes 2-10% of dry matter and contributes indigestible fiber. Micronutrient levels in are notable for minerals such as iron, , and , often exceeding those in plant-based feeds, alongside B-group vitamins. Iron concentrations can reach up to 80-100 mg per 100 g in like grasshoppers and , while levels typically range from 20-50 mg per 100 g. , uncommon in plant sources, is present in several edible at levels sufficient to qualify as a dietary source, with variability tied to microbial activity in the gut during rearing. These profiles are influenced by factors including the insect's feed substrate, with organic waste diets potentially enhancing mineral accumulation but requiring analysis to ensure safety. Bioactive compounds in include (AMPs) such as and cecropins, produced as part of innate immune responses, alongside chitin-derived with demonstrated properties . These peptides exhibit activity against and fungi, as evidenced by lab assays showing inhibition zones comparable to synthetic antibiotics. and further contribute to potential and effects, though their concentrations fluctuate with and processing methods like drying or defatting. Overall, the nutritional composition underscores ' role as a nutrient-dense feed , subject to empirical verification through proximate .

Comparative Nutritional Value Versus Conventional Feeds

Insect meals derived from species such as black soldier fly larvae () and mealworms (Tenebrio molitor) typically contain 40-60% crude protein on a basis, comparable to (44-48%) and slightly below fishmeal (55-65%), though lipid content in (15-40%) exceeds that of both conventional sources ( ~1-2%, fishmeal ~8-10%). This protein is highly digestible, with apparent ileal digestibility coefficients for in reaching 85-95% for black soldier fly larvae meal, akin to fishmeal's ~90% but superior to 's variable rates (often 80-85%) due to ' lower levels of anti-nutritional factors like trypsin inhibitors and phytates prevalent in soy. Essential amino acid profiles in insect meals often align closely with fishmeal, outperforming in and content; for instance, exhibit levels matching or exceeding fishmeal (2.5-3.0% of protein), while black soldier fly larvae surpass soy in , , and but show relative deficiencies in and compared to fishmeal, necessitating potential supplementation for optimal balance in formulations exceeding 20% replacement. assessments via chick growth assays confirm black soldier fly larvae meal's efficiency ratio approximates that of fishmeal and exceeds , supporting equivalent weight gains when substituted at moderate levels. Empirical trials demonstrate that partial substitution of fishmeal or with meals yields comparable animal growth rates; meta-analyses of studies indicate no significant differences in final or feed when replacing up to 50% of fishmeal with meals like or black soldier fly, with trials showing similar outcomes for 10-30% inclusion without yield losses, though full replacement may elevate chitin-related gut fill effects reducing net protein utilization. These trade-offs highlight ' viability as a protein-dense alternative with balanced profiles (e.g., higher iron and than soy), but requiring formulation adjustments to mitigate imbalances in specific absent in conventional feeds.

Variability and Processing Effects on Nutrition

The nutritional composition of insects intended for use as varies substantially based on the rearing substrate, reflecting the direct incorporation of substrate nutrients into larval . Substrates high in protein, such as spent grains from processes, can increase larval crude protein content by 15% or more compared to fruit-based diets, as demonstrated in controlled trials with black soldier fly larvae. Organic waste substrates, including food by-products, often promote higher fat accumulation—up to 30% in some cases—due to elevated availability, but this can lead to inconsistent profiles across batches. In contrast, standardized grain- or vegetable-based substrates yield more predictable macronutrient levels, minimizing deviations in essential and supporting reliable feed formulation. Post-harvest methods further influence nutritional quality by reducing moisture and anti-nutritional compounds like chitin-derived inhibitors, though they introduce risks of degradation. or hot-air effectively inactivates enzymes and pathogens while preserving overall digestibility, but temperatures above 60°C can cause oxidative damage to polyunsaturated fats, including a reported 10-15% loss in content during prolonged exposure. Grinding into meal enhances by breaking down exoskeletons, yet excessive mechanical stress combined with heat may denature 5-10% of heat-sensitive vitamins like . Freeze-drying minimizes such losses, retaining higher levels of labile micronutrients compared to convective methods, but its higher energy demands limit scalability for feed production. Standardization remains challenging due to inherent batch-to-batch variability, particularly in bioactive like , which typically comprise less than 5% of total fats in substrate-fed unless diets are deliberately enriched with algal or oils. Substrate-driven fluctuations in content—ranging from near-zero in grain-fed cohorts to 2-4% with lipid-supplemented feeds—underscore the need for controlled rearing protocols to achieve consistent nutritional outputs suitable for precise diet integration. Experimental data indicate that without such controls, variability in ratios can exceed 20% between production runs, complicating comparisons to conventional feeds like .

Viable Insect Species

Black Soldier Fly Larvae

Black soldier fly larvae (Hermetia illucens) represent a leading species in industrial-scale insect feed production, valued for their capacity to convert organic waste into high-protein biomass. These larvae efficiently bioconvert substrates such as food waste and agricultural byproducts, achieving waste reduction rates up to 84.8% and biomass yields of approximately 27.9% of input mass. Feed conversion ratios (FCR) for black soldier fly larvae reared on organic waste typically range from 1.7 to 3.6, depending on substrate quality and rearing conditions, indicating efficient resource utilization compared to some conventional feeds. On a basis, black soldier fly larvae contain about 40-42% crude protein and 29-30% , providing a nutrient-dense profile suitable for animal nutrition. Protein content can vary from 39.9% to 43.1% in prepupae across different substrates, with balanced essential supporting their role as a feed . Their prevalence in commercial operations stems from scalability; facilities have reached outputs of 5,000 tons of protein meal annually from processing 90,000 tons of organic material. A distinctive trait of black soldier fly larvae is their self-harvesting behavior: as they mature into prepupae, they instinctively migrate from rearing substrates, facilitating automated collection and minimizing labor inputs in production systems. This natural locomotion enables efficient separation without mechanical processing, enhancing economic viability at scale. authorization for their use in feed since 2017 has further supported commercial expansion.

Mealworms and Other Beetles

Mealworms, the larvae of Tenebrio molitor, provide a protein content ranging from 50% to 60%, complemented by levels of 20% to 34%, positioning them as a nutrient-dense option for . Their profile is comprehensive, supporting applications in diets where high-quality protein is essential. In the , dried forms of T. molitor larvae received authorization for inclusion in and feeds in April 2021, following earlier approvals for use. Although T. molitor exhibits slower larval growth rates compared to dipteran —typically requiring 8–12 weeks to reach harvestable size—their reared yields a stable nutritional output suitable for partial diet replacement. Trials indicate benefits from antimicrobial fatty acids and peptides in mealworms, which may bolster immunity in fed animals, though levels vary by substrate. Digestibility studies in growing pigs confirm high ileal availability, comparable to conventional animal proteins. The lesser mealworm (), a related tenebrionid, offers analogous with protein contents of 50–65% on a dry basis and essential , rendering it viable for foods and exploratory trials. Inclusion experiments with T. molitor in swine diets demonstrate efficacy at levels up to 6% for pigs, enhancing average daily gain without adverse effects on feed intake or . Higher incorporations, reaching 25% in some formulations, have shown no rejection due to texture or , supporting scalability in non-ruminant rations.

Crickets, Houseflies, and Emerging Species

House crickets (Acheta domesticus) offer a protein content of approximately 60-70% on a dry weight basis, making them a viable feed , though their production is hindered by susceptibility to pathogens such as Acheta domesticus densovirus (AdDV), which can cause mortality rates up to 100% in dense rearing conditions. Feed conversion ratios (FCR) for typically range from 1.7 to 2.3, indicating efficient biomass production relative to feed input, but higher initial setup costs and disease management requirements limit scalability compared to more robust species. Efforts to develop disease-resistant genetic strains are underway to enhance resilience, though empirical data on long-term viability remains preliminary. Housefly (Musca domestica) larvae provide an alternative through their ability to rapidly convert organic waste, such as , into high-protein , achieving up to 63% crude protein content and supporting of or with minimal supplemental feed. Their short life cycle enables quick breeding cycles on low-value substrates like swine or , reducing waste volume by grazing on microbial communities and producing larvae suitable for partial replacement in or diets. This approach leverages houseflies' tolerance to variable substrates, though optimization of egg loading and microbial safety during processing is essential for consistent yields. Among emerging species, silkworm () pupae show promise in Asian trials, yielding up to 60% crude protein and 25% fat on a dry basis, with established rearing on mulberry leaves enabling high biomass output for partial substitution in and feeds. Desert locusts (Schistocerca gregaria) demonstrate experimental viability when reared on plant wastes like leaves, supporting growth supplementation in diets at levels up to 3% with benefits to body weight and in trials on . These species offer potential for region-specific scaling, but challenges include regulatory hurdles for wild-harvested locusts and the need for controlled rearing to avoid residues, with ongoing focusing on nutritional equivalence and cost-effectiveness.

Applications in Animal Production

Use in Aquaculture

Insect meals, particularly from black soldier fly larvae (), have been evaluated as fishmeal substitutes in feeds for finfish and crustaceans, with empirical trials focusing on growth rates, feed efficiency, and health outcomes. Meta-analyses of studies conducted between 2015 and 2023 show that partial replacements of 25–50% fishmeal with insect meal sustain comparable growth performance in species like (Salmo salar) and (Oncorhynchus mykiss), without adverse effects on feed conversion ratios or overall biomass yield. Norwegian feeding trials on demonstrated that incorporating up to 10–20% black soldier fly larvae meal maintains fillet quality parameters, including color, texture, and gaping scores, with no detectable sensory differences from fed conventional diets. Higher inclusion levels in diets, such as full replacement in some formulations, preserved digestibility and immune responses, though optimal levels vary by insect processing method and larval substrate. For (Litopenaeus vannamei), black soldier fly larvae meal enhances survival rates by 10–15% through chitin-derived immunostimulatory effects, which bolster and resistance without altering growth trajectories. Feeding trials confirm that supplementation from insect exoskeletons improves vibriosis tolerance, supporting higher stocking densities in intensive systems. Adoption of insect-based feeds in European and aquaculture operations accelerated from 2023 to 2025, driven by fishmeal shortages from , with EU facilities reporting up to 12% annual market growth in insect protein integration for salmonid production. In , farms have incorporated 5–15% insect meal in commercial diets, correlating with improved resilience amid pressures.

Integration in Poultry, Swine, and Ruminant Diets

In poultry production, partial substitution of conventional protein sources with insect meal, such as black soldier fly larvae (BSFL), at inclusion rates up to 10% maintains growth performance, feed conversion ratios, and overall health without adverse effects, as evidenced by meta-analyses of feeding trials. Higher inclusions, such as 15% BSFL meal, similarly show no negative impacts on broiler weight gain or feed efficiency in controlled studies. Insect meals also enhance meat quality attributes, including reduced feed conversion and improved profiles, while supporting intestinal and potentially decreasing reliance on antibiotics. For , particularly weaned piglets, dietary inclusion of BSFL or extracts reduces incidence through properties and improved gut , as demonstrated in challenge trials with pathogens like porcine epidemic virus. Supplementation with full-fat BSFL meal at levels supporting 5-15% protein replacement sustains or improves average daily feed intake and body weight gain, while lowering diarrheal rates compared to soy-based controls. These effects stem from bioactive compounds in , including , which exhibit activity without compromising carcass quality or growth metrics in finishing pigs. In diets, regulatory restrictions in the currently limit meal use due to concerns over processed animal proteins and transmissible spongiform encephalopathies, confining approvals primarily to non- species like and . Experimental trials, however, indicate potential benefits, with inclusion reducing enteric by 16-18% in some species through alterations in fermentation patterns. Meta-analyses and feeding studies across confirm no significant dips in growth performance at 5-15% inclusion levels when substituting soy or other proteins, supporting viability where regulations permit. Further research is needed to address regulatory hurdles and scale applications, but causal links to improved feed efficiency persist in non-EU contexts.

Role in Pet Food and Alternative Livestock

Insect-derived proteins, notably from black soldier fly larvae (Hermetia illucens), are increasingly incorporated into pet foods as hypoallergenic alternatives to traditional meat sources, particularly for dogs exhibiting adverse food reactions. These larvae provide protein levels of 40-60% on a dry matter basis, surpassing many conventional feeds in digestibility and essential amino acid profiles, which supports muscle maintenance and immune function in pets. Clinical trials have demonstrated their efficacy in managing allergies, with formulations replacing common allergens like beef or chicken while maintaining palatability. The sector benefits from consumer demand for sustainable, novel proteins, often marketed with emphasis on environmental benefits, facing fewer regulatory barriers than livestock feeds due to pet food's non-production status. The global insect-based market, valued at USD 120.98 million in 2024, is projected to reach USD 303.92 million by 2033, reflecting a of 9.5% driven by premium and specialty product lines. This expansion aligns with broader insect protein trends, where the overall market stood at USD 483.1 million in 2023 and anticipates 16.9% CAGR through 2030, with applications comprising a notable segment amid rising ownership and concerns. In alternative livestock such as rabbits and goats, especially in developing regions facing feed scarcity, insect meals serve as partial substitutes for soybean or fishmeal, offering empirical advantages in palatability and nutrient efficiency. Studies confirm that animals accept these feeds readily, enabling replacements of 25-100% of soymeal without compromising intake or growth performance. For rabbits, insect inclusion supports high digestibility (76-98%) akin to animal proteins, while in goats and other small ruminants, it enhances protein utilization in low-resource settings. These applications leverage insects' ability to valorize organic waste, reducing costs in resource-constrained areas, though scalability remains limited by production economics.

Environmental and Sustainability Analysis

Resource Use Efficiency (Water, Land, Feed Conversion)

Insect production demonstrates superior resource use efficiency compared to conventional , particularly in and requirements per unit of protein output. For , black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) and mealworms typically require 1-6 liters per kilogram of protein, deriving most hydration from moist feed substrates rather than external irrigation, in contrast to production's 15,000-20,000 liters per kilogram of protein due to high in and feed crop systems. exhibit similar low demands, with lifecycle assessments indicating overall water footprints 80-95% below those of proteins when reared in controlled environments that recycle humidity. Land use is minimized through and compact rearing systems, enabling densities of thousands of larvae per square meter. Producing 1 kg of protein from or mealworms occupies 3.5-15 m², versus 200-250 m² for , reflecting ' rapid growth cycles (4-6 weeks) and minimal space for housing compared to grazing lands. Recent 2023 lifecycle analyses confirm 80-90% reductions in land footprint for BSFL on organic substrates, as vertical stacking and waste-based feeds eliminate expansive crop fields needed for soy or in diets. Feed conversion ratios (FCR) for range from 1.5-2.5 kg feed per kg gain, efficient for protein yield when adjusted for 40-60% dry matter protein content, comparable to soy meal's 1.2-2.0 but superior in circularity by utilizing food waste or substrates that offset virgin feed inputs. BSFL achieve FCRs as low as 2.09 on brewery waste, converting low-value organics into high-protein with rates up to 25%, enhancing system-wide efficiency beyond linear soy production reliant on arable monocultures. Mealworms and show FCRs of 1.7-2.2 on grain diets, with waste amendments further lowering effective ratios by 20-30% through reduced net feed sourcing.
ResourceInsects (e.g., BSFL, Mealworms, Crickets)Beef
Water (L/kg protein)1-615,000-20,000
Land (m²/kg protein)3.5-15200-250
FCR (kg feed/kg gain)1.5-2.56-10

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Waste Valorization

Insect production for feed generates (GHG) emissions ranging from 1 to 10 kg CO₂-equivalent per kg of dry across life cycle assessments (LCAs), influenced primarily by substrate type, species, and energy inputs for rearing and processing. For black soldier fly larvae (BSFL), emissions can reach 12.9 to 30.1 kg CO₂-eq per kg of protein when fed high-quality substrates, exceeding fishmeal's typical 2 to 5 kg CO₂-eq per kg due to metabolic heat and drying requirements that add 20 to 50% to the footprint in energy-intensive setups. Waste-based substrates mitigate this by lowering upstream feed emissions, though direct respiration and waste decomposition during rearing contribute and . Waste valorization represents a key advantage, as like BSFL convert organic waste into protein-rich , achieving reduction rates of 65.5% to 85% by mass and diverting material from landfills where anaerobic decay produces potent equivalent to 25 to 80 times CO₂'s over 20 years. This process captures 70% or more of organic carbon and , minimizing GHG releases from untreated waste while producing —a stabilized with lower potential than raw or scraps. Pre-treatments such as addition further reduce on-site emissions during BSFL rearing on waste, enhancing net environmental benefits. European studies from 2020 to 2024 on integrated systems using report net GHG positives, with avoided credits offsetting production emissions by 20 to 50% in pilot farms, though depends on local availability and infrastructure. These findings hold despite variability in LCAs, where substrate sourcing credits are critical; without them, footprints align closer to or exceed conventional proteins, underscoring the causal link between integration and gains.

Empirical Critiques of Sustainability Claims

Lifecycle assessments of insect protein production reveal environmental impacts that often exceed those of conventional feeds like . A 2025 UK government-commissioned study by , using ISO 14040/14044 standards, found that black soldier fly larvae protein has a impact of 12.9–30.1 kg CO₂ equivalent per kg of protein, ranging from 5.7 to 13.5 times higher than depending on feedstock type. This disparity arises primarily from energy-intensive and stages required to produce shelf-stable insect meal, which can account for substantial portions of the total footprint. In 13 of 16 environmental categories assessed, including acidification and ecotoxicity, insect meal performed worse than both and . Sustainability claims frequently assume rearing on substrates to minimize , but indicates this is rarely achieved at scale. Large-scale operations often rely on feed-grade grains or instead, due to regulatory restrictions on use (e.g., bans on certain contaminants), inconsistency in supply, and risks of . Approximately 75% of producers use such crop-based feeds, which negates purported land and water savings by diverting resources from direct human or consumption. Even when is utilized, the overall impact remains higher than soy in most scenarios, as processing demands outweigh diversion benefits. Controlled rearing environments impose additional energy burdens that undermine low-input narratives. Insect farms require climate-controlled facilities with heating, ventilation, and measures, leading to elevated use—particularly in temperate regions like the , where insulation and renewable integration are needed but insufficiently scaled. Processing into dried meal further amplifies energy needs, offsetting reductions claimed in early studies based on hypothetical or small-scale trials. Global production volumes remain low at around 12,000 tonnes annually, highlighting scalability constraints tied to these infrastructural demands rather than inherent biological efficiency. These factors contribute to no clear pathway for protein to decarbonize feed systems without major, unproven technological advances.

Economic Viability

Production and Processing Costs

The production of insect meal for involves rearing larvae on organic substrates, harvesting, and processing into dried protein-rich products, with costs currently dominated by labor, energy, and substrate preparation. Estimates place the cost at $2–$5 per of protein, significantly higher than fishmeal's approximately $1.5 per , reflecting inefficiencies in small-to-medium-scale operations and the nascent stage of industrialization. These figures derive from analyses of black soldier fly () and other species, where fresh biomass yields limit output per unit input compared to established protein sources like fishmeal, which benefits from mature supply chains. Processing costs, particularly and sterilization to achieve shelf-stable with low microbial loads, account for 30–50% of total expenses due to the high content (60–70%) in harvested larvae requiring energy-intensive . Conventional or drum methods consume substantial or , amplifying operational burdens in regions with elevated energy prices; for instance, analyses of European facilities highlight how these steps inflate unit costs by necessitating specialized equipment not yet optimized for scale. Sterilization via or further adds to this, ensuring pathogen-free products but at a premium over less demanding alternatives like soy or fishmeal processing. Economies of scale and substrate shifts offer potential mitigation. Large-scale facilities utilizing agricultural or food —rather than costly formulated feeds—could lower production costs to around $1 per kilogram of protein by 2030, as projected in economic modeling that assumes widespread adoption of low-value inputs and automated rearing systems. However, such reductions hinge on technological advancements in efficiency and , with current pilots demonstrating variability tied to local availability and infrastructure. In practice, facilities like those employing black soldier flies report ongoing challenges in achieving consistent yields from heterogeneous streams, underscoring the gap between theoretical projections and real-world inefficiencies.

Market Dynamics and Growth Projections (2023–2035)

The global insect feed market was valued at approximately USD 1.0 to 1.5 billion in 2023, according to multiple industry analyses, reflecting early-stage primarily in and sectors. Projections estimate a (CAGR) of 15-18% through 2035, potentially expanding the market to USD 7-11 billion, with demand as the primary driver—accounting for over 43% of current applications due to insects' high protein content serving as a fishmeal substitute in and feeds. This growth trajectory assumes continued regulatory approvals and cost reductions, though estimates vary widely across reports, with some forecasting lower CAGRs around 10-12% if issues persist. Key drivers include geopolitical supply chain disruptions, such as the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, which reduced global exports by an estimated 10-15% and spiked prices, prompting feed producers to explore localized alternatives less dependent on imported oilseeds. The region, holding about 35% of the market share in recent assessments, benefits from massive output in countries like and , where feeds address feed import vulnerabilities and support export-oriented . However, these factors hinge on empirical demand signals rather than speculative premiums, as proteins currently command 2-3 times the price of soy meal on average. Risks to these projections include economic non-viability without external support, as 2024 analyses critique insect production costs—often exceeding USD 2,000 per ton for black soldier fly meal—rendering it uncompetitive against subsidized soy or fishmeal in unsubsidized markets. European subsidies and grants, totaling tens of millions in recent years for pilots, may inflate growth forecasts by masking true marginal costs, with some reports warning of greenwashing risks where environmental claims overlook higher energy inputs compared to conventional feeds. Independent assessments suggest that absent breakthroughs in or substrate , could stall below 5% of total by 2035, prioritizing niche high-value uses over broad replacement.

Barriers to Scalability and Competitive Positioning

Scaling to displace even a marginal share of conventional protein sources in global requires substantial expansion, as current production capacities remain negligible relative to . Estimates indicate that achieving just 1% replacement of global feed protein—dominated by at approximately 280 million metric tons annually—would necessitate a tenfold or greater increase in dedicated insect rearing facilities, given present output levels in the range of tens of thousands of tons per year. High capital expenditures for automated rearing systems, climate-controlled environments, and further constrain proliferation, with upfront costs limiting beyond niche operations. Competitive pressures exacerbate these challenges, as insect meal prices, ranging from $3,500 to $6,000 per metric ton in 2023, far exceed those of at around $500 per metric ton, rendering imports of soy—often sourced from efficient large-scale producers in —far more economical for feed formulators. This cost disparity, where insect protein commands five to twelve times the price of soy, undermines market entry without subsidies or technological cost reductions, particularly in price-sensitive sectors like and . Market projections underscore limited penetration potential, with insect protein expected to capture less than 5% of the relevant feed segments by 2030 absent breakthroughs in or feedstock efficiency, as forecasted demand peaks at around 500,000 metric tons against a multi-billion-ton global protein market. Sustained high production costs and immaturity position as a premium rather than disruptive alternative, with economic viability hinging on unproven scaling efficiencies.

Technical and Biological Challenges

Rearing and Scalability Constraints


Rearing insects for feed encounters biological limits tied to population density, where overcrowding impairs growth and survival. In black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae, densities exceeding 10 larvae per cm² reduce individual final weights by up to 13% and growth rates by as much as 38% compared to optimal levels of 5–7.5 larvae per cm², due to restricted movement and competition for feed. Similar density effects occur in mealworms and crickets, with high stocking leading to stressed physiology and diminished biomass yields, necessitating precise spacing to maximize output per unit area. Tropical species predominant in feed production, such as black soldier flies, demand controlled environments to replicate native conditions, with temperatures of 25–30°C and of 60–75% essential for larval development and ; temperatures below 19°C or above 30°C cause elevated mortality rates exceeding 20% in some trials. Facilities outside equatorial zones require energy-intensive heating, ventilation, and systems, complicating large-scale operations in temperate regions and adding operational bottlenecks. Substrate constraints further hinder scalability, as larvae of key species like black soldier flies rely on organic wastes for nutrition, with availability limited to localized sources such as byproducts or municipal organics, capping expansion beyond urban-adjacent scales without supplemental feed diversification. Inconsistent waste quality and volume disrupt rearing cycles, as suboptimal substrates reduce conversion efficiency by 15–25% in controlled studies. Global production reflects these limits, with insect-based feed output in 2023 estimated at under 100,000 metric tons—less than 0.01% of the 1.1 billion metric tons of total produced annually—highlighting empirical barriers to meeting even a fraction of demand despite promotional claims.

Nutritional Imbalances and Feed Integration Issues

Insect meals contain , a in exoskeletons that reduces digestibility by inhibiting and protein absorption, particularly in animals and young where chitinase activity is limited. This leads to lower apparent digestibility coefficients for , protein, and energy in diets with high insect inclusion, with showing constrained protein utilization due to chitin's indigestibility without enzymatic processing. Studies indicate that unprocessed insect meals require formulation adjustments, such as limiting to 5–10% blends in starter feeds for and to avoid growth impairments in juveniles. Feed integration trials reveal optimal inclusion rates of 5–15% meal for maintaining growth performance without supplemental additives, beyond which nutrient imbalances exacerbate, including potential deficiencies in calcium relative to ratios inherent in many species. In , weight gain declines above 10% inclusion, while tolerate up to 29% black soldier fly meal before growth reductions occur, necessitating species-specific balancing with conventional ingredients like soy or . Palatability issues emerge at inclusions exceeding 20%, with reduced feed intake reported in some trials due to off-flavors or textural changes, though lower levels generally support acceptance. These constraints highlight the need for dechitinization or enzymatic treatments to enhance , as raw integration often fails to match the nutritional equivalence of traditional proteins without such interventions.

Pathogen and Toxin Risks

Insect larvae used as feed can encounter mycotoxins, such as aflatoxin B1 and deoxynivalenol, via contaminated substrates like grain byproducts or manure. Black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens) larvae demonstrate minimal bioaccumulation, excreting or metabolizing these compounds efficiently, with detectable levels in larvae reduced by orders of magnitude compared to input feed or absent entirely in multiple species. Coleoptera and dipteran larvae similarly exhibit high excretion rates, limiting toxin transfer to harvested biomass. Pathogenic bacteria, notably Salmonella spp., represent a contamination risk in wild-caught insects exposed to environmental or fecal sources, potentially introducing hazards into feed chains. Farmed insects under controlled rearing show negligible presence when hygiene protocols are followed, though lapses in sanitation can enable proliferation from substrates or facilities. No Salmonella or high E. coli loads were detected in analyzed edible insect samples destined for feed, underscoring substrate sourcing and facility management as primary vectors. Heat treatment during processing effectively mitigates microbial risks, reducing loads in meal through inactivation, with low-technology applications achieving substantial log reductions alongside pre-harvest gut purging via . Empirical data from European assessments indicate low contaminant incidence in processed feeds following standardized protocols, with EFSA evaluations confirming and levels below thresholds in approved products. Insect-derived proteins carry potential allergenicity risks, exhibiting with tropomyosins and allergens, which may sensitize in feeding trials. Animal studies report allergic responses in dogs fed meal, including gastrointestinal symptoms, suggesting possible residue transfer to derived meats and warranting long-term monitoring for in production animals.

Regulatory Landscape

European Union Frameworks and Approvals

The 's regulatory framework for as primarily falls under the Feed Hygiene (EC) No 183/2005 and rules on processed animal proteins (PAP), with classified as such since they derive from non-vertebrate animals. In 2017, Commission (EU) 2017/893 authorized the inclusion of PAP derived from seven insect species—Acheta domesticus, Musca domestica, , Tenebrio molitor, Locusta migratoria, Gryllodes sigillatus, and Zophobas morio—in feeds, marking the initial approval for commercial use to partially replace fishmeal. This authorization was based on safety assessments confirming low risk of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) when are reared on non-ruminant substrates. Subsequent expansions occurred in 2021 through Regulation (EU) 2021/1372, permitting insect PAP in and feeds following epidemiological improvements in BSE cases and EFSA evaluations of nutritional equivalence and risks. Approvals specify maximum inclusion levels, such as up to 50% replacement of fishmeal in diets for like and , supported by trials demonstrating no adverse effects on growth or health at 25-50% substitution rates. feeds remain prohibited for insect PAP due to ongoing TSE safeguards under Regulation (EC) No 999/2001, though insect oils face no such restrictions. In February 2024, the Standing Committee on , Animals, and Feed (SCoPAFF) clarified that live qualify as feed materials under and may be used legally for non-ruminant , provided they comply with substrate restrictions to prevent BSE-linked contaminants. The International Platform of for and Feed (IPIFF), a self-regulatory industry association, plays a key role by developing production guidelines aligned with hygiene standards, submitting safety dossiers to the (EFSA), and facilitating risk assessments for novel species or uses. Support for insect feed production ties into broader sustainability initiatives under the , with over €1.5 billion in EU investments channeled to insect sector firms via programs like and the (CAP), fostering job creation in rural areas and aligning with Farm to Fork Strategy goals for alternative proteins. These frameworks emphasize substrate controls—prohibiting catering waste or for reared —to mitigate contaminants, ensuring only vegetable or approved by-products are used.

United States and North American Regulations

In the , the (FDA) regulates insect-based ingredients in under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, treating them as potential novel ingredients that must demonstrate safety to avoid adulteration, without a federal prohibition on their use. Producers often pursue (GRAS) status through self-affirmation or FDA notification for animal food uses, with the FDA maintaining an inventory of submitted notices evaluating safety for intended species. The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) supports model regulations adopted by states, defining permissible ingredients like black soldier fly larvae meal for salmonid feeds since 2016, though acceptance varies across approximately 18 states that permit broader insect inclusion pending compliance with safety standards. State-level feed laws introduce variances, as individual states enforce AAFCO guidelines with differing registration, labeling, and inspection requirements, potentially complicating interstate commerce but allowing flexibility for innovation absent uniform federal pre-approvals. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (ARS) has conducted trials on insect meal integration, such as black soldier fly and products in diets, to assess scalability and nutritional efficacy from 2023 onward, reflecting a research-driven approach rather than restrictive . A notable example of market dynamics over regulatory hurdles occurred in 2025, when Innovafeed voluntarily paused operations at its , pilot facility for 18 months due to funding challenges, despite prior successful trials, underscoring the U.S. emphasis on voluntary compliance and economic viability. In , the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) oversees feeds under the Feeds Act and Regulations, requiring registration and safety assessments for insect-derived single-ingredient feeds, with approvals granted for specific species like black soldier fly larvae in and salmonid diets since 2016. Processed insect proteins must undergo efficacy and safety evaluations for target species, minimizing risks like exposure, though fewer restrictions apply to pet foods produced under sanitary conditions. Overall, North American frameworks prioritize demonstrated safety and market entry over prescriptive species-by-species authorizations, fostering innovation through GRAS notifications, AAFCO definitions, and targeted approvals compared to more centralized systems elsewhere.

Asia-Pacific and Global Variations

In Southeast Asia, insect-based feeds benefit from relatively permissive regulatory environments that facilitate traditional and emerging practices. Thailand, a global leader in cricket production, has implemented voluntary Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) standards for insect farming since the establishment of these guidelines by the Department of Livestock Development, emphasizing hygiene and pest control to support export-oriented production. In 2023, the National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards promoted black soldier fly larvae as a primary ingredient in animal feeds, highlighting its role in sustainable protein sourcing without imposing stringent novel feed approvals. Singapore's Food Agency approved 16 insect species, including crickets and mealworms, for use in animal feed on July 8, 2024, with requirements for importers to ensure compliance with hygiene and contaminant limits, serving as a potential model for regional harmonization. Across ASEAN countries, dedicated insect feed regulations remain sparse, though broader sustainable agriculture guidelines adopted in 2022 reference insect meals like those from black soldier flies and crickets as viable alternatives in livestock diets. In , the absence of specific standards for inclusion in feeds as of 2021 has enabled rapid expansion of black soldier fly production for and , driven by its efficiency in converting organic waste, though this unregulated approach raises concerns over substrate quality and potential heavy metal accumulation. Empirical data indicate higher adoption rates in such low-regulation Asian markets— accounts for over 90% of global black soldier fly producers for feed—attributable to cultural familiarity and cost advantages, yet resulting in quality variability, including inconsistent nutritional profiles and hygiene risks from unmonitored farming practices. Beyond , regulatory approaches vary, often aligning with North American frameworks while incorporating local pilots. Canada's Feeds Regulations, updated in 2024, mandate registration and species-specific safety assessments for insect-derived ingredients, prohibiting harmful contaminants and requiring efficacy data for use, similar to U.S. processes but with emphasis on inter-provincial compliance. regulates insect meals under general stockfeed laws via the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority, excluding them from ruminant feed bans if free of prohibited animal materials, though ongoing state-level efforts seek explicit approvals to address substrate restrictions like . In , the supports black soldier fly pilot projects for feed production, leveraging local waste streams for scalability in countries like and , where unregulated small-scale farming predominates but faces challenges in standardization and market integration. These variations underscore faster uptake in less regulated contexts, tempered by empirical evidence of pathogen risks from variable production standards.

Controversies and Alternative Perspectives

Scrutiny of Overhyped Sustainability Narratives

Claims that insect-based feed substantially lowers (GHG) emissions relative to soy or have faced scrutiny from lifecycle assessments revealing conditional or negligible benefits. A 2025 report indicated that insect protein production can generate up to 13.5 times higher climate impacts than soy and 4.2 times higher than , primarily due to demands in processing, drying, and facility operations. Similarly, a KAUST study on black soldier fly larvae (BSFL) in a non-tropical context like found that BSFL protein emissions exceed those of owing to intensive use for climate control and . These analyses highlight how mainstream narratives often rely on idealized tropical rearing scenarios, overlooking real-world constraints in regions like where heating and artificial lighting inflate energy footprints to levels comparable with soy processing. A government-funded study further concluded that insect feed does not reliably contribute to sustainable food systems, as purported GHG reductions fail to materialize at scale without offsetting increases in other environmental metrics like resource intensity. Sustainability advocacy for has been propped up by public investments in alternative proteins, including research totaling tens of millions of euros from 2020 to 2024, which subsidize development and skew comparisons against unsubsidized conventional feeds like soy that exhibit superior efficiency under market conditions. Pro-market critiques argue that such interventions create artificial hype, advocating instead for voluntary, gradual integration of where economically viable rather than policy-driven mandates that ignore full-cost accounting. Narratives also underemphasize for industrial-scale insect facilities, including and systems, which erode claims of inherent land-sparing superiority over field-based soy cultivation.

Ethical Debates on Insect Welfare and Sentience

The scientific evidence for insect is limited and debated, with studies demonstrating nociceptive responses—reflexive avoidance of harmful stimuli—but lacking consensus on subjective pain or comparable to vertebrates. For instance, fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster) larvae exhibit behavioral escapes from mechanical, thermal, and chemical noxious stimuli via dedicated multidendritic neurons, suggesting sensory detection of potential harm. Similarly, 2022 behavioral assays in fly larvae and adults revealed motivational trade-offs, such as prioritizing escape over feeding when injured, indicative of possible negative affective states. However, ' decentralized nervous systems, absence of a , and simpler cognitive capacities distinguish them from vertebrates, where sentience indicators like self-recognition or flexible learning are more robust; a 2024 survey of entomologists found acknowledgment of a "realistic possibility" of sentience in some species but no definitive proof. Insect farming practices raise welfare concerns if sentience exists, as high-density rearing—common for scalability—can elevate stress through resource competition, altered immune function, and increased , potentially affecting growth and survival rates. Experimental data on reared , such as crickets and flies, show that densities exceeding optimal thresholds (e.g., beyond 1-2 individuals per cm² in larvae) lead to reduced feeding efficiency and heightened vulnerability to environmental stressors, though direct physiological stress markers like elevated corticotropin-releasing factor analogs remain understudied in farmed contexts. Slaughter methods, including immersion in near-boiling water, rapid freezing, or grinding, are standard but criticized for prolonging nociceptive activation; alternatives like electrical or exposure have been proposed yet lack species-specific validation for minimizing distress. Ethical viewpoints diverge sharply: animal rights advocates contend that even uncertain warrants precautionary avoidance of mass-scale exploitation, citing the trillions of farmed annually as amplifying potential equivalent to or exceeding . In contrast, utilitarian analyses argue that, given empirical doubts on insect pain depth and the vast scale of wild invertebrate , farmed could reduce net harm by substituting for higher-sentience , provided rearing optimizes and killing —though this hinges on further neurobehavioral data to weigh welfare costs against benefits. These positions underscore ongoing calls for welfare protocols, such as limits and validated , amid advocacy from groups like Eurogroup for Animals, which highlight risks in non-native species farming despite counterarguments favoring evidence-based pragmatism over assumption-driven restrictions.

Cultural and Market Acceptance Hurdles

In Western societies, cultural aversion to as manifests primarily through and food , leading to reluctance in consuming derived products such as insect-fed . Surveys indicate that willingness to try insect-based s or feeds remains below 30%, with cited as a core psychological barrier incompatible with prevailing food norms associating with or . A 2020 Hungarian consumer study of 414 respondents rated acceptance of insect-fed at 3.96 on a 7-point scale, significantly lower than free-range (5.11), with females (3.41) and those with (2.88) showing heightened aversion linked to perceptions of as unnatural feed components. These factors extend to labeling concerns, where explicit mentions of insect-fed origins exacerbate rejection, though familiarity with production processes can marginally mitigate and . Market adoption faces economic constraints from insect meal's high production costs, currently priced at $3,500–6,000 per metric ton—several times that of fishmeal ($1,400–1,800) or soybean meal ($500)—confining it to niche applications like pet food and aquaculture rather than broad livestock integration. Consumers show limited willingness to pay premiums for insect-fed animal products, further hindering scalability in cost-sensitive sectors. In contrast, Southeast Asian markets exhibit higher acceptance due to entrenched entomophagy traditions, with Thailand producing approximately 7,500 tons annually and stakeholders projecting over 200,000 tons of fresh larvae by 2025, driven by cultural normalization rather than novelty. Recent analyses, including a 2023–2024 , forecast slow mainstreaming of feed without enhanced transparency on safety and benefits, as psychological barriers and economic unviability persist in Western contexts while regional disparities limit global uniformity. Despite 95% of 2022 industry investments targeting feed ($1.2 billion total), low consumer premiums and scaling challenges predict niche persistence over widespread displacement of conventional feeds.

References

  1. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-46603-z
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9502457/
  3. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/15/8/619
  4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343519300508
  5. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2023.1200031/full
  6. https://academic.oup.com/af/article/13/4/102/7242424
  7. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/12867Policybrief_Insects.pdf
  8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949824424001587
  9. https://www.fairr.org/news-events/insights/sustainability-in-aquaculture-feed-why-insect-farming-is-not-the-answer
  10. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/global-edible-insects-for-animal-feed-market
  11. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10936363/
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8779955/
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327800081_Indigenous_knowledge_and_potential_of_termites_as_poultry_feed_in_Burkina_Faso
  14. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/10/3/69
  15. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/fsn3.2428
  16. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8358373/
  17. https://www.fao.org/4/X6503E/X6503E13.htm
  18. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42690-019-00059-w
  19. https://scispace.com/pdf/replacement-of-fish-meal-with-maggots-in-broiler-diets-3f252axj82.pdf
  20. https://www.feedipedia.org/node/671
  21. https://doi.org/10.1016/0044-8486(81)90047-8
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5664030/
  23. https://www.fao.org/4/i3253e/i3253e.pdf
  24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.10.021
  25. https://protix.com/discovery-centre/a-royal-opening
  26. https://agfundernews.com/meet-the-founder-protixs-kees-arts-on-insect-ag-you-cant-come-in-with-a-silicon-valley-playbook-and-outcompete-a-legacy-industry-in-3-years
  27. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/insect-protein-market
  28. https://www.feedandadditive.com/aquaculture-growth-drives-fish-meal-and-fish-oil-shortages/
  29. https://www.aquafeed.com/newsroom/editors-picks/fishmeal-and-fish-oil-shortage-iii-novel-ingredients/
  30. https://www.petfoodindustry.com/insect-based-cat-and-dog-food/news/15754500/innovafeed-suspends-operations-at-decatur-illinois-insect-facility
  31. https://www.feedbusinessmea.com/2025/10/11/innovafeed-pauses-u-s-operations-as-part-of-a-phased-strategy/
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11377066/
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8831828/
  34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352364616300013
  35. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405654525000824
  36. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/16/8/799
  37. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40143741/
  38. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214799321001156
  39. https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/891904D63018BB943576E2B62D2B2F56
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9777846/
  41. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10303881/
  42. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-12150-3
  43. https://www.entomologyjournals.com/assets/archives/2024/vol9issue12/9388.pdf
  44. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996925001395
  45. https://www.feedinfo.com/partners-research-library/beneficial-properties-of-insects-antimicrobial-peptides-chitin-and-lauric-acid-partners-research/320079
  46. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S003257912200551X
  47. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/10/5447
  48. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/12/13/1700
  49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0044848620315623
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10486501/
  51. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-76571-8
  52. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0275213
  53. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/11/19/3075
  54. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032579123008180
  55. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10000218/
  56. https://brill.com/view/journals/jiff/11/17/article-p49_6.xml
  57. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214574521000869
  58. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6523706/
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7216978/
  60. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833524002326
  61. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0956053X22000010
  62. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Feed-conversion-rate-FCR-obtained-over-15-production-batches-B1-to-B15-The-FCR-is_fig2_346414578
  63. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0044848623009687
  64. https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/6/10/91
  65. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309148084_Nutritional_composition_of_black_soldier_fly_Hermetia_illucens_prepupae_reared_on_different_organic_waste_substrates
  66. https://thelogic.co/news/canada-black-soldier-flies-agriculture/
  67. https://www.nal.usda.gov/research-tools/food-safety-research-projects/automating-black-soldier-fly-rearing-farm-waste-recycling-and-income-generation
  68. https://www.echocommunity.org/en/resources/86a8212a-a048-41c6-ab31-536c111e75ac
  69. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S235251342400262X
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10053216/
  71. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346380683_Mealworm_Tenebrio_molitor_Larvae_as_an_Alternative_Protein_Source_for_Monogastric_Animal_A_Review
  72. https://ipiff.org/insects-eu-legislation-general/
  73. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S175173112300201X
  74. https://jasbsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40104-023-00945-x
  75. https://www.animbiosci.org/journal/view.php?doi=10.5713/ab.21.0447
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6409481/
  77. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378310092_Alphitobius_diaperinus_larvae_lesser_mealworm_as_human_foods_-_An_approval_of_the_European_Commission_-_A_critical_review
  78. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09712119.2023.2176311
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4932593/
  80. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328584427_Nutrient_ileal_digestibility_evaluation_of_dried_mealworm_Tenebrio_molitor_larvae_compared_to_three_animal_protein_by-products_in_growing_pigs
  81. https://rethinkpriorities.org/research-area/farmed-cricket-welfare/
  82. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/fstr/25/4/25_597/_html/-char/en
  83. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/14/7/588
  84. https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/16670/3/hackewitz_l_210518.pdf
  85. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/17/9494
  86. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8670987/
  87. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171708
  88. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1056617125000431
  89. https://bmcmicrobiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12866-021-02418-5
  90. https://entomologytoday.org/2017/02/09/farm-to-trough-how-house-flies-could-reduce-waste-and-feed-livestock/
  91. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/12/11/956
  92. https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/OutputFile/1647281
  93. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9325104/
  94. https://brill.com/view/journals/jiff/10/5/article-p885_12.xml?language=en
  95. https://epsj.journals.ekb.eg/article_363435_d4f06019d26ab44bd6681d0f737306c6.pdf
  96. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365866569_Locusts_and_grasshoppers_nutritional_value_harvesting_and_rearing_for_animal_feed_and_other_applications
  97. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23311932.2025.2566440
  98. https://www.aimspress.com/article/doi/10.3934/aas.2025006?viewType=HTML
  99. https://www.globalseafood.org/advocate/fillet-quality-and-sensory-characteristics-of-atlantic-salmon-fed-black-soldier-fly-larvae-meal/
  100. https://www.intrafish.com/feed/new-insect-meal-trial-paves-the-way-for-the-widespread-use-of-insect-protein-in-the-salmon-industry/2-1-1529724
  101. https://orgprints.org/32138/1/Stadtlander_2017.pdf
  102. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/15/18/2661
  103. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40759796/
  104. https://www.entobel.com/en/chitin-in-aquaculture-benefits-and-drawbacks/
  105. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jwas.13070
  106. https://www.openpr.com/news/4231251/european-insect-feed-market-valued-at-us-536-9-mn-in-2025-driven
  107. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0044848623012863
  108. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6562956/
  109. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1828051X.2023.2194909
  110. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/13/6/1239
  111. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11117209/
  112. https://bmcvetres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12917-022-03550-8
  113. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09712119.2022.2147185
  114. https://www.animbiosci.org/journal/view.php?number=24812
  115. https://www.entomofago.eu/en/2016/01/13/insetti-come-mangime-per-animali-capiamone-di-piu/
  116. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8471967/
  117. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0034528823000267
  118. https://petzyo.com.au/blogs/news/black-soldier-fly-larvae-in-dog-food
  119. https://www.mdpi.com/2306-7381/12/1/68
  120. https://www.dvm360.com/view/the-buzz-on-insect-based-diets-a-new-hypoallergenic-protein-source-
  121. https://globalpetindustry.com/news/the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-insect-based-pet-food/
  122. https://www.marketgrowthreports.com/market-reports/insect-based-pet-food-market-103800
  123. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377840114002326
  124. https://zootechnical.com/article/135131/en
  125. https://jasbsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40104-021-00671-2
  126. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12026621/
  127. https://www.jiminis.com/en/blog/eating-insects-for-the-environment/
  128. https://academic.oup.com/af/article/13/4/112/7242422
  129. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9107018/
  130. https://forwardfooding.com/blog/foodtech-trends-and-insights/alternative-protein-what-about-insects/
  131. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/14/9/1332
  132. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666833525001777
  133. https://jasbsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40104-022-00682-7
  134. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10425145/
  135. https://www.allaboutfeed.net/all-about/new-proteins/study-compares-environmental-impact-of-insect-protein-vs-soy-and-fishmeal/
  136. https://www.poultryworld.net/health-nutrition/nutrition/study-compares-environmental-impact-of-insect-protein-vs-soy-and-fishmeal/
  137. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959652622001949
  138. https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-024-06516-8
  139. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10456
  140. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301479720300049
  141. https://www.feedandadditive.com/new-report-insect-protein-could-be-13-5-times-worse-for-climate-than-soy/
  142. https://sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/ProjectDetails?ProjectId=21021
  143. https://www.ricardo.com/en/news-and-insights/industry-insights/animal-feed-source-lca
  144. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44264-024-00042-0
  145. https://sefari.scot/sites/default/files/documents/SEFARI%20-%20Insect%20final%20report%20-%20Tiwasing%20and%20Pate%20-%20final.pdf
  146. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11117214/
  147. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-approximate-cost-of-insect-meal-top-compared-to-fishmeal-middle-and-soybean-meal_fig1_383368630
  148. https://www.frontier-economics.com/media/o12jxgjt/frontier-economics_delivering-insect-feed-at-scale_final-report_01-12-23.pdf
  149. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12181085/
  150. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s44187-025-00318-5
  151. https://www.sphericalinsights.com/reports/insect-feed-market
  152. https://straitsresearch.com/report/insect-feed-market
  153. https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/insect-feed-market
  154. https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/insect-feed-market
  155. https://www.coherentmarketinsights.com/industry-reports/insect-feed-market
  156. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9563949/
  157. https://www.mannainsect.com/local-insect-protein-vs-global-risks-with-soy/
  158. https://academic.oup.com/af/article/13/4/41/7242425
  159. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383368630_Insect-based_livestock_feeds_are_unlikely_to_become_economically_viable_in_the_near_future
  160. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/files/eurogroupforanimals/2024-09/09%25202024_insect%2520farming%2520a%2520six%2520legged%2520problem_report_efa.pdf
  161. https://www.feedinfo.com/our-content/insight-demand-for-insect-protein-could-reach-500k-tonnes-by-2030-rabobank/225041
  162. https://forwardfooding.com/blog/foodtech-trends-and-insights/cracking-the-cost-code-scaling-insect-farming/
  163. https://www.welthungerhilfe.org/global-food-journal/rubrics/climate-resources/insects-as-climate-friendly-alternative-to-meat-a-myth
  164. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44264-025-00075-z
  165. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/16/1/5
  166. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731124002970
  167. https://jor.pensoft.net/article/86496/
  168. https://www.mannainsect.com/climate-control-ensures-consistent-bsf-farming/
  169. https://edepot.wur.nl/583853
  170. https://inno-plussystems.com/en/markets/insect-farming/
  171. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731124003343
  172. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11857012/
  173. https://www.feedandadditive.com/global-animal-feed-market/
  174. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2025.1592625/full
  175. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405654522000841
  176. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468550X22001642
  177. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9264974/
  178. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Inclusion-rates-of-insects-in-the-diet-of-poultry-in-the-trials-included-in-the_fig1_332729438
  179. https://research.wur.nl/en/publications/factors-affecting-the-decision-making-process-of-using-insect-bas
  180. https://brill.com/view/journals/jiff/10/10/article-p1707_5.pdf
  181. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731125000783
  182. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5848191/
  183. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6722799/
  184. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691523002478
  185. https://www.izsvenezie.com/salmonella-edible-insects-scientific-literature/
  186. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0362028X22054564
  187. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11171339/
  188. https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2019.e170907
  189. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-023-00241-y
  190. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9749447/
  191. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8165055/
  192. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751731125000515
  193. https://ipiff.org/live-insects/
  194. https://ipiff.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Annex-7-IPIFF_Guide_A4_2019-final-version-v9.pdf
  195. https://www.allaboutfeed.net/all-about/new-proteins/eu-funding-opportunities-for-the-insect-farming-sector/
  196. https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/animal-foods-feeds/animal-food-ingredients
  197. https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/generally-recognized-safe-gras-notification-program/current-animal-food-gras-notices-inventory
  198. https://www.lrrd.org/lrrd35/8/3572ndho.html
  199. https://www.ifpti.org/cohort-5/lewis
  200. https://www.ars.usda.gov/oc/utm/insect-meal-a-grand-challenge/
  201. http://inspection.canada.ca/en/animal-health/livestock-feeds/consultations/registration-requirements
  202. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10425141/
  203. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350976850_Regulations_on_insects_as_food_and_feed_a_global_comparison
  204. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10252440/
  205. https://www.agrithai.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Agricultural-food-standards-agency-to-promote-use-of-insect-larvae-for-making-animal-feeds.pdf
  206. https://insightplus.bakermckenzie.com/bm/intellectual-property/singapore-singapore-food-agency-approves-16-insect-species-for-human-consumption
  207. https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2023_App-1.-ASEAN-Regional-Guidelines-for-Sustainable-Agriculture_adopted.pdf
  208. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0044848621004208
  209. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2024-132/FullText.html
  210. https://www.apvma.gov.au/registrations-and-permits/chemical-product-registration/stockfeed-petfood-regulation
  211. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10425149/
  212. https://repository.kaust.edu.sa/bitstreams/f0627fd1-1e2a-457f-9ac5-d40049b09797/download
  213. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/news/insects-feed-wont-lead-sustainable-food-systems-government-funded-study-shows
  214. https://gfieurope.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/State-of-the-European-alternative-protein-research-ecosystem_-funding-2020-April-2024.pdf
  215. https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/land-use-biodiversity/why-insect-farming-is-no-silver-bullet-drive-wean-world-off-meat-2025-03-20/
  216. https://ecoevorxiv.org/repository/view/6919/
  217. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10063880/
  218. https://resjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/een.13415
  219. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/animal-emotions/202405/the-current-state-of-the-science-of-insect-sentience
  220. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/physiology/articles/10.3389/fphys.2025.1628696/full
  221. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8876875/
  222. https://www.animal-ethics.org/insect-exploitation-a-massive-ethical-problem/
  223. https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/YcDXWTzyyfHQHCM4q/a-primer-for-insect-sentience-and-welfare-as-of-sept-2023
  224. https://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/files/eurogroupforanimals/2024-09/09%202024_insect%20farming%20a%20six%20legged%20problem_report_efa.pdf
  225. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/10/8/1312
  226. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224423001620
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.