Effect of different feed on nutritional content of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens): A systematic review and meta-analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens) or BSF is commonly used in food industry as a meat substitute to reduce food waste and environmental pollution. It could grow effectively using organic material such as manure and food waste. In this study, a comparison of the nutritional content of BSF fed with manure and food waste will be determined by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. The information about protein, fat, carbohydrate, ash, and calcium content of manure or food waste fed BSF from various scientific database sources was analyzed and discussed. There were 720 literatures selected to be included in the meta-analysis dataset, with the main selection criteria: original research articles published in the last ten years with nutritional data on manure and food waste fed BSF. From the literature screening process, 8 articles were obtained and included in the meta-analysis. Based on meta-analysis, it was found that the food waste fed BSF group has approximately 16% higher protein content, 33% higher fat content, but 59% lower ash content if compared to manure fed BSF group. However, the use of food waste as BSF feed did not give a significant effect on BSF carbohydrate and calcium content when compared to manure fed BSF.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it