Edited by: Alessandra Bordoni, University of Bologna, Italy
Reviewed by: Lenka Kourimska, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Czechia; Jose Paulo Andrade, Universidade Do Porto, Portugal
This article was submitted to Nutritional Epidemiology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Nutrition
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Edible insects are proposed as a nutritious and environmentally sustainable alternative source to animal proteins, due to their numerous advantages in terms of reduced ecological impact and high nutritional value. However, the novelty for edible insects relies on the content of bioactive ingredients potentially able to induce a functional effect in the body. The present review summarizes the main findings on the antioxidant properties of edible insects available in the literature. A total of 30 studies involving animals, cell cultures, or
香京julia种子在线播放
Entomophagy, the practice of eating insects and invertebrates, has been part of human history for centuries, playing a significant role in cultural and religious practices. Recently, a new global interest in edible insects and invertebrates arises from the impellent necessity of preserving agriculture resources to feed the 9 billion world's population predicted for 2050 and to obtain a drastic reduction of the ecological impact of food production, accounting for between 20 and 30% of the total environmental impact (
Edible insects are characterized by a high nutritional value, and they are good potential sources of proteins, amino acids, minerals, and lipids (
A search for literature investigating the antioxidant effect of edible insects was carried out by PubMed database (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD) using the following keywords: “edible insect,” “oxidative,” and “antioxidant.” Eligible studies for this mini-review have included randomized controlled trials in humans, experimental animals, or cell cultures or
0.05–5 mg/ml | DPPH | + | Messina et al. ( |
|
10 mg/ml | DPPH | + | Navarro del Hierro et al. ( |
|
500 μg/ml | ABTS, DPPH, FRAP | + | Pyo et al. ( |
|
200 μg/ml | Nitric scavenging activity | + | ||
10 g/50 ml | DPPH, ABTS, FRAP | + | Anuduang et al. ( |
|
0.25–6.25 mg/ml | DPPH | + | Dutta et al. ( |
|
1.25–12.5 mg/ml | FRAP, SAHR, SRSC | + | ||
– | ABTS, DPPH | + | Son et al. ( |
|
3 g/10 ml | ABTS, DPPH, FRAP | + | Mancini et al. ( |
|
0.625–5.0 mg/ml | DPPH, FRAP, ORAC, SAHR, hydrogen peroxide radical scavenging activity | + | Tang et al. ( |
|
0.1–1.0 mg/ml | ABTS | + | Flores et al. ( |
|
1 g/100 ml | ABTS | + | Alves et al. ( |
|
0.25–6.25 μg/μl | DPPH | + | Dutta et al. ( |
|
1.25–15 μg/μl | SAHR, SRSC | + | ||
1.25–10 μg/μl | Activities of CAT and GST enzymes | + | ||
1 mg/ml | ABTS, DPPH, metal ion chelating activity | + | Hall et al. ( |
|
FRAP | - | |||
– | ABTS, DPPH, Fe2+ chelating activity | + | Zielinska et al. ( |
|
– | ABTS | + | Hwang et al. ( |
|
- | DPPH | + | ||
14 g/l | SAHR | + | Mintah et al. ( |
|
2 mg/ml | ABTS | + | Mintah et al. ( |
|
4 mg/ml | FRAP, SRSC | + | ||
10–200 μg/ml | DPPH | + | Sun et al. ( |
|
0.1–4 mg/ml | β-carotene and linolenic acid bleaching test | + | ||
Various ( |
– | ABTS hydro, ABTS lipo, FRAP | + | Di Mattia et al. ( |
Various ( |
1–500 mg/ml | DPPH | + | Shantibala et al. ( |
Antioxidant activity of edible insects and invertebrates in cellular and animal models.
RAW264.7 | 0.1, 0.3, 0.5 mg/ml | NO | Yoon et al. ( |
|
NO ↔ | ||||
NO ↔ | ||||
C2C12 | 7.5, 10*, 12.5* mg/ml | Lipid peroxidation: MDA ↓*; ROS ↓*; GST ↑* | Dutta et al. ( |
|
D-HMVECs | 5, 10 mg/ml | NO ↓ | Ahn et al. ( |
|
RAW264.7 | 20–100 μg/ml | NO ↓ | Hwang et al. ( |
|
hPBL | 5–2,000 ppm | TOS ↔ (↑ 2,000 ppm) TAC ↔↑15 ppm, ↓1,000, 2,000 ppm | Koc et al. ( |
|
TOS ↔ (↑ 2,000 ppm); TAC ↔ (↑10 ppm, ↓1,000, 2,000 ppm) | ||||
TOS ↔ (↑ 2,000 ppm); TAC ↔ (↓ 2,000 ppm) | ||||
hPBL | 5–2,000 ppm | TAC ↑ (10–40 ppm), ↓ (2,000 ppm) TOS ↑ (1,000, 2,000 ppm) | Memis et al. ( |
|
TAC ↑ (10–25 ppm), ↓ (500–2,000 ppm) TOS ↑ (200–2,000 ppm) | ||||
RAW264.7 | WS: 25–500 μg/ml LS: 0.05–5 μg/ml | NO ↓ | Son et al. ( |
|
THP-1 | 0.4, 0.8*, 1.2*μg/μl | GST, CAT ↑ | Dutta et al. ( |
|
THP-1 | 0.8 μg/μl | ROS ↓ | ||
hPlasma | 1.25–10.00 μg/μl | GST ↑ (except for 1.25 and 2.50 μg/μl) CAT ↑ (except for 1.25 μg/μl) |
Wistar rats, hypercholesterolemia | 1, 2*, 4** ml/kg/day | 6 weeks | Serum: TAC*, SOD *, **, GPx *,**↑; MDA ↓ Liver: TAC, SOD ↑; GPx ↔; MDA ↓ | Zou et al. ( |
|
Green cocoon shell of |
ICR mice, type 2 diabetes | 150, 250*, 350* mg/kg | 7 weeks | Liver: GPx, SOD ↑; MDA, 8-OHdG ↓* | Zhao et al. ( |
Wistar rats, obesity | 100, 200* mg/kg | 2 months | Blood protein carbonyl content ↓*(2 m) CAT ↔ Liver: MDA↓ Serum: uric acid ↔↓(1 m), ↑(2 m) | Ahn et al. ( |
|
BKS.Cg-m+/+Leprdb mice, diabetes | 5 mg/kg | 1 month | Carbonyl content: blood ↓, liver ↔. GST ↔; CAT, GPx ↑ | Ahn et al. ( |
|
Sprague–Dawley rats, varicocele | 1.63, 6.5 mg/kg | 42 days | Testicular tissues:MDA, ROS/RNS ↓SOD, GPx, CAT ↑ | Karna et al. ( |
|
C57BL/6J mice, alcoholic liver damage | 200 mg/kg | 2 weeks | Liver: 8-OHdG, MDA ↓ Small intestine: 8-OHdG ↓ | Hwang et al. ( |
|
C57BL/6 mice, obesity | 100, 200* mg/kg/day | 7 weeks | Liver: GPx ↑; CAT ↑* | Ahn et al. ( |
|
Sprague–Dawley rats, alcoholic liver disease | 50, 100, 200 mg/kg/day | 8 weeks | Liver: β-oxidation ↑ | Choi et al. ( |
A total of eight intervention studies on animal models characterized by hypercholesterolemia, diabetes, obesity, and alcoholic liver damage have been published. In more detail, Zou et al. (
In this review, we showed that different species of edible insects display an antioxidant activity in
On the basis of the positive results of the three studies focused on NO production in macrophages, radical involved in the modulation of inflammation and immune regulation (
As regards the insects, 35 different species were investigated; the ones that arouse major interest in researchers were
On the basis of the reviewed evidences, edible insects might represent a source of novel redox ingredients at low ecological impact able to modulate oxidative stress. However, due to the fact that majority of these evidences have been obtained
MS conceived the review topics. VD'A wrote the initial draft. MS and NB revised and supervised the entire work. All authors approved the submitted version.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine
2′-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid)
catalase
1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl
compound
ferric reducing antioxidant power
greenhouse gas emissions
glutathione peroxidase
glutathione S-transferase
lipo-soluble extract
malondialdehyde
nitric oxide
Nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor
oxygen radical absorbance capacity
protein hydrolysates
reactive nitrogen species
reactive oxygen species
scavenging activity on hydroxyl radicals
superoxide dismutase
superoxide radical scavenging capacity
total antioxidant capacity
Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity
total oxidant status
whole insect
water-soluble extract.