Nutrient quality and maturity status of frass fertilizer from nine edible insects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, there is growing interest to recycle organic waste using insect larvae into high-quality frass fertilizer through circular economy approach. This paper presents the first comparative report on the nutrient concentrations, fertilizing indices, nutrient supply potentials and compost maturity of nine edible insect frass fertilizers. Our results revealed that frass fertilizers from all the insect species had adequate concentrations and contents of macronutrients [nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), potassium (K)], secondary nutrients (calcium, magnesium, and sulphur) and micro-nutrients (manganese, copper, iron, zinc, boron, and sodium). The fertilizing indices of the frass fertilizers were above 3. However, black soldier fly (BSF) frass fertilizer had significantly higher N (20-130%) and K (17-193%) concentrations compared to others. The P concentration of Gryllus bimaculatus frass fertilizer was 3-800% higher compared to those of frass fertilizers from other insect species. The potential N and K supply capacities of BSF frass fertilizer was 19-78% and 16-190% higher, respectively. The P supply capacity of cricket frass fertilizer was 17-802% higher compared to others. The highest seed gemination rate (> 90%) and germination index (267%) were observed in seeds treated with BSF frass fertilizer. Frass fertilizer obtained from the other eight insect species showed medium to high phytotoxicity. These findings demonstrate that insect frass fertilizers are promising alternatives to existing commercial fertilizers (i.e., mineral, and organic) for improved soil health and crop yield.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".