Search results

Honey bee broods (larvae and pupae) can be consumed as human food, offering a rich nutritional value. Therefore, the objective of this work was to present an overview of the nutritional value of the honey bee brood and its gastronomic potential. The results indicated that honey bee broods are rich in protein (including essential amino acids), fat (essentially saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids), carbohydrates, vitamin C and those of the B complex, and minerals such as potassium, magnesium, calcium, and phosphorous. The results further highlight some variability according to the stage of development, with increasing content of fat and protein and decreasing carbohydrates from the larval to the pupal stages. The production of the honey bee brood in the hive, as well as its removal, can impact the wellbeing of the hive. This limits the production potential of the brood aimed at application for gastronomic purposes. The consumption and purchase of honey bee broods as food may be accessible in specialised markets where, for example, ethnic communities consume this type of food. However, in some markets, insects or products produced from insects are not readily accepted because of neophobia and disgust. The role of culinary chefs allied to traditional ways of preparing culinary dishes that include honey bee broods are relevant to motivate more people in western societies to consume of these types of food products.

Insects have been reported as a possible alternative solution to help feed the growing world population with less stress on the planet, thus contributing to the preservation of the environment and natural ecosystems. However, the consumption of edible insects (EIs), although culturally accepted for some communities, is not readily accepted for others. Hence this work explores the level of information that people in a traditionally non-insect-eating country have about the sustainability issues related with EIs, and also some possible reasons that could motivate their consumption. The study was based on a questionnaire survey and the results were explored by descriptive statistic tools, tree classification analysis, factor analysis and cluster analysis. The results showed that the level of information is still low in general, with most people not manifesting an opinion. However, some aspects are relatively familiar to the participants (88.9% know that the ecological footprint of insects is smaller than other meats and 86.9% know that they efficiently convert organic matter into protein). Factor and cluster analysis showed three classes: cluster 1—people not informed about the facts disclosed through the true statements and also not able to distinguish the false information; cluster 2—people not informed about the facts disclosed through the true statements but who were able to distinguish the false information; and cluster 3—people well informed about the facts disclosed through the true statements but who were marginally unable to distinguish the false information. It was also found that education, sex and professional area are the most relevant sociodemographic factors associated with the level of information, and the highest motivations to consume EIs are their contribution to preserve the environment and natural resources followed by being a more sustainable option (for 64.7% and 53.4% of participants, respectively). Hence it was concluded that, although some work still needs to be done to better inform people about EIs, there is already some conscientiousness that they constitute a good and more sustainable alternative to other types of mea

Edible insects (EI) have been consumed as traditional foods in many parts of the globe, but in other regions, they are not readily accepted, particularly in Western countries. However, because EI are suggested to constitute a more sustainable protein food as compared with other sources of animal protein, they can be considered a future food that could help mitigate hunger and malnutrition. Additionally, new gastronomic trends are already targeting this area for exploring new potentialities. The objective of this work was to develop and validate a questionnaire to assess consumers’ perceptions and knowledge about EI in seven different domains: D1. Culture and Tradition, D2. Gastronomic Innovation and Gourmet Kitchen, D3. Environment and Sustainability, D4. Economic and Social Aspects, D5. Commercialization and Marketing, D6. Nutritional Aspects and D7. Health Effects. The 64 items were subjected to item analysis and reliability analysis for validation, and factor analysis was also conducted to identify a grouping structure. The results validated all the items of the seven subscales with high values of Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.732 for D1, α = 0.795 for D2, α = 0.882 for D3, α = 0.742 for D4, α = 0.675 for D5, α = 0.799 for D6 and α = 0.788 for D7). However, by eliminating 17 items, the final values of the alpha increased in all subscales. Factor analysis with extraction by principal component analysis with varimax rotation extracted 14 factors that explained, in total, 65% of the variance, although the first two factors were the most important (35.7% variance explained). In conclusion, the confirmed usefulness of the questionnaire has been hereby validated for assessing consumer perceptions of and knowledge about EI.

Development of the EISUFOOD questionnaire : Edible Insects as Sustainable Foods

Edible insects (EI) have been consumed as traditional foods in many parts of the globe, but in other regions, they are not readily accepted, particularly in Western countries. However, because EI are suggested to constitute a more sustainable protein food as compared with other sources of animal protein, they can be considered a future food that could help mitigate hunger and malnutrition. Additionally, new gastronomic trends are already targeting this area for exploring new potentialities. The objective of this work was to develop and validate a questionnaire to assess consumers’ perceptions and knowledge about EI in seven different domains: D1. Culture and Tradition, D2. Gastronomic Innovation and Gourmet Kitchen, D3. Environment and Sustainability, D4. Economic and Social Aspects, D5. Commercialization and Marketing, D6. Nutritional Aspects and D7. Health Effects. The 64 items were subjected to item analysis and reliability analysis for validation, and factor analysis was also conducted to identify a grouping structure. The results validated all the items of the seven subscales with high values of Cronbach’s alpha (α = 0.732 for D1, α = 0.795 for D2, α = 0.882 for D3, α = 0.742 for D4, α = 0.675 for D5, α = 0.799 for D6 and α = 0.788 for D7). However, by eliminating 17 items, the final values of the alpha increased in all subscales. Factor analysis with extraction by principal component analysis with varimax rotation extracted 14 factors that explained, in total, 65% of the variance, although the first two factors were the most important (35.7% variance explained). In conclusion, the confirmed usefulness of the questionnaire has been hereby validated for assessing consumer perceptions of and knowledge about EI.

The international research project EISUFOOD - Edible Insects as Sustainable Foods.

Edible insects have been suggested as a more sustainable source of protein, but their consumption varies according to geographical and sociocultural influences. Focusing on the different aspects that can influence people’s attitudes towards edible insects (EI), this work aimed to carry out the statistical validation of an instrument aimed at assessing different dimensions of this field: the KPEI (knowledge and perceptions about EI) scale. The instrument consists of 64 questions distributed by the following dimensions: Culture and Tradition, Gastronomic Innovation and Gourmet Kitchen, Environment and Sustainability, Economic and Social Aspects, Commercialization and Marketing, Nutritional Characteristics, and Health Effects. The data were collected in 13 countries (Croatia, Greece, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, and Turkey). The validation of the KPEI scale was made through Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The results revealed two acceptable models, both retaining 37 of the 64 initial items, distrusted by the seven dimensions as: Culture and Tradition (5 items), Gastronomic Innovation and Gourmet Kitchen (5 items), Environment and Sustainability (8 items), Economic and Social Aspects (5 items), Commercialisation and Marketing (4 items), Nutritional Aspects (6 items), Health Effects (4 items). Both multifactorial models resulting from the CFA/SEM analyses showed approximately equal goodness of statistical fit indices with values of Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), Root Mean Square Residual (RMR), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) partially zero and values of Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) and Comparative Fit Index (CFI) approximately one, i.e., very close to a perfect fit. For the first-order model, the ratio between chi-square and degrees of freedom is χ 2/df = 13.734, GFI = 0.932, CFI = 0.930, RMSEA = 0.043, RMR = 0.042, SRMR = 0.042; and for the second-order model χ 2/df = 14.697, GFI = 0.926, CFI = 0.923, RMSEA = 0.045, RMR = 0.047, SRMR = 0.046). The values of composite reliability (CR = 0.967) and mean extracted variance (MEV = 0.448) are indicative of a good fit. Finally, the reliability analysis indicated a very good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.941). These results confirm the successful validation of the KPEI scale, making it a valuable instrument for future application at the international level.

This study aimed to investigate the level of knowledge about edible insects (EIs) in a sample of people from thirteen countries (Croatia, Greece, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Spain, and Turkey). Data collection was based on a questionnaire survey applied through online tools between July and November 2021. For data analysis, techniques such as factor analysis, cluster analysis, and chi-square tests were used, with a significance level of 5%. A total of 27 items were used to measure knowledge on a five-point Likert scale. Applying factor analysis with principal components and Varimax rotation, a solution that explains about 55% of variance was obtained. This accounts for four factors that retained 22 of the 27 initial items: F1 = Sustainability (8 items), F2 = Nutrition (8 items), F3 = Production Factors (2 items), and F4 = Health Concerns (4 items). Internal consistency was evaluated through Cronbach’s alpha. The cluster analysis consisted of the application of hierarchical methods followed by k-means and produced three clusters (1—‘fearful’, 2—‘farming,’ and 3—‘ecological’ individuals). The characterisation of the clusters revealed that age did not influence cluster membership, while sex, education, country, living environment, professional area, and income all influenced the composition of the clusters. While participants from Mexico and Spain were fewer in the ‘fearful’ cluster, in those from Greece, Latvia, Lebanon, and Turkey, the situation was opposed. Participants from rural areas were mostly in cluster 2, which also included a higher percentage of participants with lower income. Participants from professional areas linked with biology, food, and nutrition were mostly in cluster 3. In this way, we concluded that the level of knowledge about EIs is highly variable according to the individual characteristics, namely that the social and cultural influences of the different countries lead to distinct levels of knowledge and interpretation of information, thus producing divergent approaches to the consumption of insects—some more reluctant and measuring possible risks. In contrast, others consider EIs a good and sustainable protein-food alternative.