4.1 Article

Effects of processing methods on nutritional composition and antioxidant activity of mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) larvae

Journal

ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 49, Issue 6, Pages 284-293

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1748-5967.12363

Keywords

antioxidant activity; mealworm; nutritional composition; Tenebrio molitor

Categories

Funding

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Science and ICT [NRF-2017R1A2B4002411]
  2. Korea Institute of Planning and Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture and Forestry (IPET) through Agri-Bio industry Technology Development Program - Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) [318018-3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined the effects of different processing methods on the nutritional composition and antioxidant activity of mealworms. After processing with nine methods, we calculated the contents of protein, fat, ash, carbohydrate, minerals (P, Ca, K, Fe, Na), vitamin B group (B-1, B-2, B-3), moisture, and calories. When processed by freeze drying among freeze drying, hot air drying, oven broiling, roasting, pan frying, deep frying, boiling, steaming, and microwaving, the contents of protein, some minerals, and vitamins were the highest. The content of total minerals was lowest after deep frying, and those of vitamin B-1 and B-3 were the lowest after microwaving. Antioxidant activity was then evaluated using DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging assays. DPPH assays showed that microwaving, freeze drying, deep frying, steaming, boiling, and oven broiling of mealworms yielded scavenging activities of 20.9-29.0% at 2,000 mu g/mL, which was similar to the activity level (22.7-33.2%) of 40-60 mu M tocopherol. ABTS assays confirmed that only freeze-dried mealworms at 2,000 mu g/mL exhibited higher activity than 10 mu M tocopherol. Interestingly, similar trends were found for antioxidant activity levels and total phenolic contents in mealworms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available