MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307851610 · doi:10.1016/j.cris.2022.100049

Agrochemical contaminants in six species of edible insects from Uganda and Kenya

2022· article· en· W4307851610 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Research in Insect Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect Utilization and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchDirektion für Entwicklung und ZusammenarbeitGovernment of the Republic of KenyaDirektoratet for UtviklingssamarbeidStyrelsen för Internationellt UtvecklingssamarbeteInternational Development Research CentreRockefeller Foundation
KeywordsAgrochemicalBiologyPesticideToxicologyClothianidinFrassPesticide residueImidaclopridBotanyAgronomyAgricultureThiamethoxamLarvaEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edible insects are currently promoted worldwide as an alternative animal protein source, but they are mostly still harvested from the wild where they are predisposed to contamination with agrochemicals. This study analysed six species of edible insects (Ruspolia differens, Rhynchophorus phoenicis, Schistocerca gregaria, Oryctes sp, Pachnoda ephippiata and Acanthoplus sp) collected from different habitats and/or reared in the laboratory in Kenya and Uganda for safety from agrochemical contaminants using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. The residue levels were statistically compared with the Codex Alimentarius Commission maximum residue limits (MRLs). Residues of only nine agrochemicals were detected in the insects out of 374 chemicals which were screened. The detected agrochemicals include two insecticides (aminocarb and pymetrozine), three herbicides (atraton, methabenzthiazuron and metazachlor) and four fungicides (carboxin, fenpropimorph, fludioxonil and metalaxyl). Ruspolia differens and adult Oryctes sp were free from detectable levels of any agrochemical. Whereas the pesticides residue levels in most insect samples were within maximum residue limits, some of them notably P. ephippiata from black soldier fly larval frass, R. phoenicis from oil palm and P. ephippiata from plant compost contained 2-, 8- and 49-fold higher levels of atraton, methabenzthiazuron and metazachlor, respectively, than MRLs. These findings demonstrate that edible insects may accumulate harmful residues of agrochemicals from the environment where they breed or forage, rendering them unsafe for human consumption or feeding animals. The mechanisms for possible bioaccumulation of these agrochemicals in the insects remains to be investigated. Development of methods for farming edible insects under regulated indoor conditions to ensure their safety as sources of food or feed is recommended.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.143
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it