The increasing global need to find alternative protein/energy sources has triggered research in the field of non-conventional feed ingredients, with insects and former foodstuffs being the most promising. Insects contain high level of protein and fat, whereas former foodstuffs contain high energy in the form of carbohydrates and fats; therefore, both should be considered as promising alternative feed ingredients for livestock production. In addition to the nutritional value, they also represent a way by which food waste biomasses/streams can be upgraded to valuable feed ingredients. This review outlines the main nutritional and safety issues of insects and former foodstuffs, and also considers the legal framework involved. The importance of the type of insect metamorphosis and tailored substrates that could lead to the production of a premium feed is also described. This is also the first time that a review discusses the nutritional quality of former foodstuffs. Energy and the main nutrient content of former foodstuff are compared with the composition of common cereals as the principal energy sources in animal feed. For both ingredients a critical review of the safety issues is provided. Based on the current data available, both insects and former foodstuffs have an excellent potential use as alternative feed ingredients for livestock production. When produced in line with the criteria set by major feed/food authorities, they are characterized by high quality and safety standards. This makes them comparable to other feed materials and ingredients currently available on the market, although their full nutritional, functional, safety and sustainability evaluation cannot be considered complete.

Ex-food or former food products (FFPs) have been proposed as one of the categories with great promise as alternative feed ingredients. FFPs' nutritional potential is not yet fully exploited. Therefore, the aim of this study was to perform a nutritional evaluation of selected FFPs. In particular, six samples of mixed FFPs, all based on bakery products, were analysed for moisture, crude protein, ether extract, crude fibre, neutral detergent fibre, acid detergent fibre, starch and ash. Nitrogen-free extractives and non-structural carbohydrate were also determined. Based on FFPs' composition data, estimation of digestible energy and metabolisable energy values for pigs were calculated. Further, the in vitro digestibility values of FFPs were investigated using a multi-step enzymatic technique. A wheat sample was included as a control feed ingredient in the study. All data were reported on dry matter basis. FFPs have shown a nutrient composition comparable with cereal grains. In the tested FFPs, the average protein content was 10.0% and the average starch content was 52.4%. Nitrogen-free extractive ranged from 61.2% to 74.7%, whereas non-structural carbohydrate ranged from 58.5% to 79.3%. Compared with wheat, FFPs were characterised by a relative high fat content, averaging about 10.1%. The relatively high nitrogen-free extractive/non-structural carbohydrate/starch and fat concentration designated FFPs as valuable energy sources. Digestible energy and metabolisable energy averages were 17.2 and 16.9 MJ kg-1, respectively. The average in vitro digestibility value of FFPs samples was 88.2% ± 5.8%, comparable with that of wheat (90.6% ± 1.6%). FFPs are a fat-fortified version of common cereals grains. The high energy content and digestibility values elect FFPs as promising non-traditional ingredients for swine.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of light microscopy with differential staining techniques for the discrimination of insect material from marine arthropods – classified as fishmeal. Specifically, three samples of single-species insect material, Hermetia illucens (HI), Bombyx mori (BM) and Tenebrio molitor (TM), and two samples of marine arthropods, shrimp material and krill, were analysed and compared after staining by two reagents to enhance fragment identification. Alizarin Red (AR) and Chlorazol Black (CB), which react respectively with calcium salts and chitin, were tested for their potential efficacy in distinguishing between insect and marine materials. Results indicated that AR failed to stain HI, BM and TM materials. By contrast, the three insect species materials tested were stained by CB. When shrimp fragments and krill were considered, AR and CB stained marine materials reddish-pink and light blue to black, respectively. By combining these results, it can be suggested that CB staining may efficiently be used to mark insect materials; AR does stain shrimp fragments but does not stain the tested insect material, indicating a possible approach for discriminating between insects and marine arthropods. However, since the present study was performed on pure materials and a small set of samples, possible implementation of this technique still needs to be confirmed in complex matrices such as compound feed.