Dietary Botanicals and Rearing Environment Shape Mulberry Silkworm (Bombyx mori L., PM × CSR2) Pupae Oil: From Larval Physiology to Oil Functionality
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study tests whether upstream husbandry—specifically, botanical treatments during the fifth instar and rearing environment—can tune downstream quality of mulberry silkworm (Bombyx mori, PM × CSR2) pupae oil (SPO). We run a 4 × 2 factorial: four phytogenic treatments applied as standardised larval sprays versus controls, crossed with laboratory and field rearing. Outcomes span larval performance (growth, silk gland index, survival), chitin yield, and oil functionality: yield and proximate composition, fatty-acid profile (GC-FID), minor lipids (HPLC tocopherols/sterols), physicochemical and oxidative indices (iodine, peroxide, p-anisidine, TOTOX; OSI by Rancimat), and in-vitro bioactivities (DPPH/ABTS/FRAP/ORAC; antimicrobial zones and MIC/MBC against Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, Candida albicans). We add a 30-day micro-stability trial in two simple prototypes (salad dressing; O/W base cream) at ambient storage. We expect botanicals with juvenoid-like or antioxidant constituents to improve growth and silk metrics, modestly shift UFA: SFA and n-6:n-3, and strengthen antioxidant and anti-staphylococcal signals; field rearing may widen variability owing to temperature/humidity swings and feed consistency.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
References
AOCS. (n.d.). Official Method Cd 12b-92: Oil Stability Index (OSI). American Oil Chemists’ Society.
Benzie, I. F. F., & Strain, J. J. (1996). The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of “antioxidant power”: The FRAP assay. Analytical Biochemistry, 239(1), 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1006/abio.1996.0292
CLSI. (2024). M07—Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically (12th ed.). Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute.
EUCAST. (2024). The EUCAST MIC determination—A guide to broth microdilution testing (current online guidance). European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing.
FAO. (2013). Edible insects: Future prospects for food and feed security (FAO Forestry Paper No. 171). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
ISO. (2016). ISO 6886:2016—Animal and vegetable fats and oils—Determination of oxidative stability (accelerated oxidation test). International Organization for Standardization.
Nowak, V., Persijn, D., Rittenschober, D., & Charrondière, U. R. (2016). Review of food composition data for edible insects. Food Chemistry, 193, 39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.11.059
Ou, B., Hampsch-Woodill, M., & Prior, R. L. (2001). Development and validation of an improved oxygen radical absorbance capacity assay using fluorescein as the fluorescent probe. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 49(10), 4619–4626. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf010586o
Re, R., Pellegrini, N., Proteggente, A., Pannala, A., Yang, M., & Rice-Evans, C. (1999). Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Radical Biology and Medicine, 26(9–10), 1231–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0891-5849(98)00315-3
Rumpold, B. A., & Schlüter, O. K. (2013). Nutritional composition and safety aspects of edible insects. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, 57(5), 802–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/mnfr.201200735
Shahidi, F., & Zhong, Y. (2015). Measurement of antioxidant activity in food and biological systems. Journal of Functional Foods, 18, 757–781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2015.06.018
Tassoni, F., Cappellozza, S., Vertuan, G., Bersani, M., Saviane, A., Curzi, D., Tomasoni, C., & Savoldelli, S. (2022). From by-product to resource: Edible insects for food security and circular economy—A focus on Bombyx mori pupae. Insects, 13(7), 644. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13070644
Zhou, Y., Zhou, S., Duan, H., Wang, J., & Yan, W. (2022). Silkworm pupae: A functional food with health benefits for humans. Foods, 11(11), 1594. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11111594