Nutrient composition of Chinese oak silkworm,Antheraea pernyi, a traditional edible insect in China: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edible insects are considered to be rich in protein and several micronutrients; therefore, they are regarded as one of the potential contributors to food security. The Chinese oak silkworm,Antheraea pernyi (Guérin-Méneville, 1855), has been collected from oak trees in the wild for at least 2,000 years, and Chinese farmers developed the artificial rearing of Chinese oak silkworms for silk production before the 17th century. Recently, about 5×104 t ofA. pernyi, including the fifth-instar larvae, pupae and moths, has been reported to be consumed as food in China per year. A total of 18 amino acids, 16 fatty acids, 13 minerals, 5 vitamins and 7 human hormones have been detected in the larvae, pupae and adult moths ofA. pernyi. In this review, we have summarised the complete nutrient composition in the four developmental stages of this economically important insect. All available data suggest that the Chinese oak silkworm is nutritionally rich and healthy and a sustainable food item of the future. This review could provide a podium to the food and animal feed industry for framing a strategy for the intake ofA. pernyi in the diets of humans and animals. Moreover, this paper would contribute to advancing the exploration of the developmental and the metabolic biology of the Chinese oak silkworm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".