Next Article in Journal
Characterization and Insecticidal Efficacy of Green-Synthesized Silver Nanoparticles Against Four Stored Product Insect Species
Previous Article in Journal
Sub-Lethal Toxicity of Bifenthrin and Acetamiprid Through Dietary Trophic Route: Effects on the Foraging Activity, Social Interactions, and Longevity of Apis mellifera L.
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Could Insect Frass Be Used as a New Organic Fertilizer in Agriculture? Nutritional Composition, Nature of Organic Matter, Ecotoxicity, and Phytotoxicity of Insect Excrement Compared to Eisenia fetida Vermicompost

by
Patricia Castillo
1,
José Antonio Sáez-Tovar
2,
Francisco Javier Andreu-Rodríguez
2,
Héctor Estrada-Medina
3,
Frutos Carlos Marhuenda-Egea
4,
María Ángeles Bustamante
2,
Anabel Martínez-Sánchez
5,
Encarnación Martínez-Sabater
2,
Luciano Orden
2,*,
Pablo Barranco
2,
María José López
1 and
Raúl Moral
2
1
Unit of Microbiology, Department of Biology and Geology, CITE II-B, Agrifood Campus of International Excellence CeiA3, CIAIMBITAL, University of Almeria, 04120 Almeria, Spain
2
Institute for Agri-Food and Agro-Environmental Research and Innovation (CIAGRO-UMH), GIAAMA Research Group, University Miguel Hernández, Carretera de Beniel Km 3.2, 03312 Orihuela, Spain
3
Campus de Ciencias Biológicas y Agropecuarias, Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán, Mérida 97150, Mexico
4
Department of Agrochemistry and Biochemistry, Multidisciplinary for Environmental Studies Ramón Margalef, Carretera San Vicent del Raspeig, 03690 Alicante, Spain
5
Department of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resources, Carretera San Vicent del Raspeig, 03690 Alicante, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2026, 17(2), 142; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17020142
Submission received: 29 December 2025 / Revised: 22 January 2026 / Accepted: 24 January 2026 / Published: 27 January 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Role of Insects in Human Society)

Simple Summary

Large amounts of “frass” (insect excreta mixed with shed skins and feed residues) are generated by insect farming and this might be used as an amendment. We compared frass from four insects (mealworms, waxworms, black soldier flies, and crickets) and compared them with worm compost (vermicompost). Using a combination of chemical and spectroscopic analyses together with thermal tests and seed-based bioassays, we identified clear, species-specific differences that are important for field use. Frass from mealworms and crickets was so concentrated that it could harm plants unless it was diluted or blended, whereas frass from the other species was much gentler. Our research shows that frass acts as a rapid-action fertilizer, providing a quick nutrient boost, whereas vermicompost is better for building long-term soil health. The most effective approach is to combine the two; a small amount of frass provides plants with an immediate nutrient boost, while vermicompost creates healthy soil and protects the plants, effectively transforming insect waste into a safe and valuable organic fertilizer.

Abstract

The expanding insect farming industry generates up to 67,000 tons of frass per year. Its potential use as fertilizer is promising, but has not yet been widely studied. This study aimed to characterize the chemical composition, organic matter structure, ecotoxicity, and phytotoxicity of frass from four insect species in order to evaluate its potential as a fertilizer. We compared four types of insect frass (IF) (Tenebrio molitor, Galleria mellonella, Hermetia illucens, and Acheta domesticus) to Eisenia fetida vermicompost (EFV). We used physicochemical analyses (pH, electrical conductivity (EC), macro-micronutrients and dissolved organic carbon (DOC), spectroscopy (solid-state 13C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR)) and thermogravimetry/differential scanning calorimetry (TGA/DSC: R1, R2, Tmax), together with phytotoxicity (germination index, %GI) and ecotoxicity (toxicity units, TU) bioassays. Composition was species-dependent: A. domesticus showed the highest levels of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K); the concentration of DOC was higher in insect frass (IF) than in EFV, with the highest concentration found in IF of T. molitor. 13C NMR/FTIR profiles distinguished between frass (carbohydrates/proteins and chitin signals) and EFV (humified, oxidized matrix). Thermal stability followed: G. mellonella (R1 ≈ 0.88) ≥ A. domesticus (0.79) > H. illucens (0.73) > EFV (0.67) > T. molitor (0.50). In bioassays, T. molitor and A. domesticus exhibited phytotoxicity (%GI < 30), whereas G. mellonella and H. illucens did not. EFV exhibited the highest %GI. Dilution increased %GI in all materials, especially in T. molitor and A. domesticus, and reduced acute risk (TU). Frass is not a uniform input: its agronomic performance emerges from the interaction between EC (ionic stress), the availability of labile C (DOC, C/N and low-temperature exotherms), and structural stability (R1/R2 and aromaticity). In terms of formulation, IF can provide nutrients that mineralize rapidly, whereas EFV contributes stability. Controlling the inclusion and dilution of materials (e.g., limiting the amount of T. molitor in blends) and considering the mixing matrix helps to manage phytotoxicity and ecotoxicity, and realize the fertilizer value of the product.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

With around 2000 edible species identified and regularly consumed worldwide [1], insect production is a rapidly expanding industry. An estimated production of 67,000 tons of insects is raised on farms each year for food and animal feed. The most farmed species are the black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens), the yellow mealworm (Tenebrio molitor), and the house cricket (Acheta domesticus) [2]. Other species, such as the greater wax moth (Galleria mellonella), are of interest as model organisms for studying microbial infections, host–pathogen interactions and virulence mechanisms, as well as for testing the toxicity of antimicrobial drugs [3,4].
The black soldier fly and the yellow mealworm are valued for their ability to efficiently convert organic waste into high-quality biomass, which is used as a protein source for animals, providing solutions to the growing demand for food [5,6,7,8]. H. illucens, native to America, has spread worldwide, while T. molitor, believed to have originated in the Mediterranean region, is now found everywhere [9]. Although historically considered pests of stored products, their bioconversion capacity has transformed them into a key asset for the circular economy. A. domesticus, which is also globally distributed, is a key species in food production due to its high nutritional value and its use in the manufacturing edible products. Although not widely used for food, G. mellonella is a model organism of great importance in biomedical and microbiological research. Its status as a bee hive pest has prompted research into its biology and control, and its characteristics make it invaluable for researching microbial infections and testing the toxicity of new drugs thanks to its innate immune system, which is similar to that of mammals [10,11], and T. molitor are common pests of stored products, causing substantial losses in the food and grain storage industries [12]. This duality underscores the need for a thorough understanding of their biology in order to harness their beneficial applications while developing effective strategies to mitigate their harmful impact.
IFs are produced in large quantities due to the growing insect farming industry, particularly from species such as mealworms and black soldier flies. This makes them a promising source of fertilizers or even more [13,14]. The composition of IF varies among insects; for instance, black soldier fly frass is particularly rich in nitrogen and potassium, while cricket frass tends to have a higher phosphorus content [15,16,17]. Producing IF also offers an opportunity to transform organic waste into a valuable source of protein and fiber for meat and fish production [18]. Production of IF can be up to 40 times greater than insect biomass [19]. In a pilot-scale production process involving black soldier fly larvae and 1400 kg of food waste, approximately 239 kg of insect biomass and 230 kg of frass were produced [20]. The advantages of using IF as fertilizers, when used properly, include higher levels of readily available macronutrients, prevention of phosphorous losses, the presence of beneficial microorganisms, promotion of plant growth, enhancement of photosynthetic efficiency, biotic and abiotic stresses, as well as ease of combination with slow-release agents and biostimulants [21,22]. However, some risks associated with the chemical and microbiological composition of IF have been documented, such as heavy metals, the presence of pathogens like Salmonella and Listeria, and mycotoxin content [23,24,25].
The composition of IF includes insect excrement, exuviae (shed skins), and undigested feed residues. The exact composition is influenced by the species of insect species and the substrate on which they feed [26]. At a molecular level, IF contains proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates [27]. It also contains fatty acids, amides, and a variety of bioactive molecules, as well as hydrocarbons with both short and long carbon chains [28]. Chitin, which originates from insect exoskeletons and shed skins, is a key organic compound in IF [29]. It has been shown to be a nitrogen source for soil fungi, as well as having nematicidal, antimicrobial, antipathogenic, and antiviral effects [30,31,32,33]. While the physical parameters and nutrient composition of IF are well understood [14,34], the structure and biodegradability of its organic compounds remain unstudied.
To address this gap, we used a combination of spectroscopic and thermal approaches to characterize the composition and stabilization of organic-matter in insect frass, benchmarking it against E. fetida vermicompost. ATR-FTIR spectroscopy provides rapid functional-group fingerprints (e.g., polysaccharide C–O features, amide bands related to proteins/chitin, carbonyl/carbonate signals), enabling the qualitative comparison of biochemical signatures and the degree of transformation among substrates [35,36,37]. In parallel, solid-state 13C CP-MAS NMR resolves carbon functional domains (e.g., alkyl, O-alkyl, aromatic and carbonyl), enabling semi-quantitative descriptors of biochemical composition (e.g., carbohydrate, protein, and lignin-like contributions) and structural features linked to the decomposition stage through established integration and mixing frameworks [38]. Finally, thermogravimetric analysis (TG/DTG) and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) under oxidative conditions provide an independent view of organic-matter stability, tracking mass loss and exothermic reactions across temperature windows associated with labile versus more recalcitrant fractions. The derived indices (e.g., R1 from TG mass-loss ratios, and R2/Tmax descriptors from DSC) can be used as proxies for organic-matter stabilization and thermal recalcitrance. They are particularly informative when interpreted alongside spectroscopic fingerprints [39,40,41]. By integrating these instrumental descriptors with physicochemical traits and bioassays (phytotoxicity and ecotoxicity), this study links species-specific organic-matter composition and stability to biological outcomes. It also proposes a more diagnostic basis for defining safe, formulation-oriented management guidelines for the use of insect frass use in agriculture.
In moderate doses, IF enhances soil fertility, invertebrate and microbial activity and plant growth [29,42,43]. However, the phyto- and ecotoxicological effects of IF must be considered when using it as an organic fertilizer or as an ingredient in a complex fertilizer. It is therefore crucial to consider the potential negative effects of the excessive or unregulated application of these IF, including the inhibition of germination, mycorrhization, and plant growth due to ammonia toxicity, salinity, or high nutrient concentrations [44,45], as well as the risk of contamination by mycotoxins, dioxins, heavy metals, pesticide residues, veterinary drugs, and human foodborne pathogens [23,46]. This study compares frass from A. domesticus, H. illucens, G. mellonella, and T. molitor with E. fetida vermicompost (EFV), with the aim of: (i) quantifying nutrient and salinity traits, (ii) characterizing organic-matter composition and thermal stability (13C NMR, FTIR and TGA/DSC), and (iii) assessing phytotoxicity and ecotoxicity. The aim is to define species-specific management guidelines for the safe agricultural use of these materials.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sampling of Insects of Study

Samples were collected from commercial and research sites the UAL Entomologic Center (Almería, Spain), the ENTOGREEN® (Santarém, Portugal) and NUTRINSECT® (Montecassiano, Italy). Additionally, ten EFV samples of different EFV from the UMH-EPSO (Oirhuela, Spain) were collected as reference material for comparison with IF (Figure 1). All collected samples were dried at 60 °C, milled, and sieved to 0.5 mm prior to analysis.

2.2. Assessment of the Nature and Composition of Ifs and EFVs

IFs and EFVs were analyzed according to the methods described by Martín et al. [37]: electrical conductivity (EC) and pH were analyzed in a 1:10 (w/v) water extract. Total organic matter (TOM) was determined by loss-on-ignition at 430 °C for 24 h, and total nitrogen (TN) and total organic carbon (TOC) were measured by ignition at 1020 °C using automatic elemental microanalyzers (EuroVector elemental Analyzer, Milano, Italy). The humic (CHA) and fulvic (CFA) content was measured according to the method described in [47]: after the 1:20 alkaline (NaOH) extraction using an automatic analyzer for liquid samples (TOC-VCSN Analyzer, Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan) was used. After microwave acid digestion, total elemental content of P, K, Ca, Mg, Na, and heavy metals were analyzed by ICP-OES.

2.3. Biological Parameters

The germination index (GI) of the obtained compost was measured by assessing the germination and radicle length of garden cress (Lepidium sativum L.) was assessed according to the method of [48]. The Aboatox kit (kit 1, 243–500 BioTox; Aboatox, Masku, Finland) was used to reconstitute Aliivibrio fischeri following the manufacturer’s protocol. A luminometer (Luminoskan Ascent; Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) was used to measure luminescence. The A. fischeri ecotoxicity assay was performed in triplicate (n = 3). This level of replication is commonly used for this highly standardized and low-variability bioassay and is consistent with the experimental design principles outlined in ISO 11348-3:2007 [49]. (Water quality—Determination of the inhibitory effect of water samples on the light emission of Vibrio fischeri). The sample concentration producing a 50% decrease in A. fischeri light emission (EC50) was calculated from the corresponding regression equations. Toxicity units (TU) were calculated using the formula TU = [1/(EC50)] × 100.

2.4. Solid-State 13C NMR Spectroscopy, Fourier-Transform Infrared (FTIR) Spectroscopy, Thermogravimetric Analysis (TG/DTG) and Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC)

Samples were analyzed by solid-state 13C CP-MAS NMR (cross-polarization magic angle spinning carbon-13 nuclear magnetic resonance) using a Bruker spectrometer (Bruker AVANCE DRX500, Billerica, MA, USA) operating at 125.75 MHz for 13C. The samples were packed in a 4 mm diameter zirconium oxide rotor with Kel-F buffers and rotated at 2000 ± 100 Hz. The optimal contact time for these samples in the CP-MAS experiments was 1.0 ms. A total of 4000 scans were acquired, with an inter-scan time of 1.5 s, and the spectra were processed with an LB (line broadening) of 20 Hz. The special distribution in the range of carbon chemical shifts was calculated by integrating the signal into seven regions: carbonyl (210–160 ppm), O-aromatic (160–140 ppm), aromatic (140–110 ppm), O2-alkyl (110–90 ppm), O-alkyl (90–65 ppm), N-alkyl/methoxyl (65–45 ppm), and alkyl (45 to −10 ppm) [38]. This only indicates the predominant type of carbon in each region.
FTIR spectra were obtained from the samples using a Bruker IFS 66 spectrometer. The resolution was set to 4 cm−1 and the operating range was 600 to 4000 cm−1. The analytical technique used was attenuated total reflection (ATR) FT-IR spectroscopy. The spectra were collected using an ATR accessory, which presses the sample onto a diamond crystal. The spectrum of each sample was obtained from an average of 20 scans, with background correction against air. Functional group assignments were made according by [50].
Thermal stability was assessed using a thermogravimetric analyzer under oxidative conditions in a Mettler Toledo (TGA/SDTA851e/LF/1600) (Greifensee, Switzerland). Approximately 10 mg of the sample was heated from room temperature to 700 °C at a rate of 10 °C/min. The TG and DTG curves were analyzed to identify the stages of mass loss, and the R1 index was calculated as the ratio of the mass loss in the 400–550 °C range to that in the 200–400 °C range. This is a robust proxy for assessing the degree of organic matter recalcitrance [40,41]. DSC was performed under an air atmosphere using the same heating program as TG. Exothermic peaks were used to determine the temperatures of maximum thermal decomposition (Tmax) in two ranges (200–400 °C and 400–550 °C).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The ecotoxicity data, expressed as toxicity units (TUs), were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA to assess the differences between the frass. Prior to analysis the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variances were verified. When significant differences were detected (p < 0.05), the least significant difference (LSD) test according to Fisher was applied for pairwise comparisons. The results are displayed as boxplots, and each frass type was evaluated using three independent replicates (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Statgraphics Centurion version 19.2.01 (StatPoint Technologies, Inc., Warrenton, VA, USA).
One-way ANOVA was used to analyzed the physicochemical data obtained for IF and EFV, followed by the LSD test (p < 0.05). The Shapiro–Wilk and Levene tests were used to check for normality and homogeneity of the variances, respectively, prior to ANOVA. All statistical analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS version 30.0 software package.

3. Results

3.1. Chemical Composition of IF

Table 1 shows the elemental composition of frass from four insect species (T. molitor, G. mellonella, H. illucens, and A. domesticus). Significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed among the frass types for all analyzed macronutrients. The highest C concentration (41.9%) was found in G. mellonella frass, while the lowest was found in A. domesticus frass (34.8%). The nitrogen content was highest in A. domesticus frass (6.4%) and lowest in H. illucens frass (2.9%). This resulted in a C/N ratio that was lowest for A. domesticus frass (5.4) and highest for H. illucens frass (12.6). Frass derived from A. domesticus consistently exhibited the highest concentrations (p < 0.001) of phosphorus (P, 1.44%), potassium (K, 3.02%), calcium (Ca, 2.21%), magnesium (Mg, 0.66%), sodium (Na, 0.60%), and sulfur (S, 0.53%). The lowest concentrations of P (0.77%) and K (0.99%) were recorded in G. mellonella frass. T. molitor frass exhibited the lowest Ca content (0.19%) and Na content (0.03%). G. mellonella frass showed the lowest Mg content (0.15%), and T. molitor frass had the lowest S content (0.21%). The Si concentration was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in G. mellonella frass (1.32%) than in the frass of the other species. Statistically significant differences (p < 0.001, unless otherwise specified) were found for micronutrients and most trace elements across the different frass samples. The highest levels of Fe (871 ppm), Cu (66.2 ppm), Mn (473 ppm), Zn (587 ppm), Mo (6.37 ppm), Ni (9.4 ppm), Cr (11.0 ppm), Al (871 ppm), Cd (0.17 ppm), Pb (1.03 ppm), Co (1.03 ppm), Ti (27.1 ppm), Sr (36.9 ppm), and Rb (25.4 ppm) were found in A. domesticus frass. G. mellonella frass was the richest in B (756 ppm) and Be (0.16 ppm), but contained the lowest amounts of Fe (42 ppm), Cu (4.3 ppm), Mn (39 ppm), Zn (57 ppm), and Mo (0.27 ppm). The lowest Ni (1.2 ppm) and Cr (1.5 ppm) concentrations were found in T. molitor frass. H. illucens frass showed the lowest level of Cd (0.04 ppm). A general comparison of IF with EFV revealed higher levels of C, N, and S, but lower levels of Ca, Fe, Cu, Mn, and Zn. Other micronutrients and trace elements were present in low concentrations in both types of organic materials. The fulvic and humic carbon values determined in IF were statically higher than those in EFV (Table 2).

3.2. Nature of Organic Matter in IF Compared to EFV

The physicochemical profiles of IF and EFV are reported in Table 2. Statistical differences in pH were found between the various insect frass and EFV samples. Frass from G. mellonella, A. domesticus, and especially T. molitor had a pH value below 7, while the frass from H. illucens and EFV were slightly alkaline with values above 7. With the exception of A. domesticus frass, all the IF samples exhibited EC values similar to those of EFV (2.30–5.77 dS m−1). The content of dissolved organic carbon content is much higher in insect frass than in EFV. Furthermore, we observed a statically significant difference when comparing the different IF samples. The frass from A. domesticus and G. mellonella had similar DOC content, while the DOC of H. illucens was intermediate, and the DOC content of T. molitor was twice that of A. domesticus and G. mellonella.

3.3. Spectral and Structural Composition

The solid-state 13C CP-MAS NMR spectra of IF in a solid state revealed distinctive molecular profiles, enabling detailed interpretation of the chemical structures and quality of the organic matter. Integrating spectral region quantification with the biomolecular mixing model proposed by [38] enabled the relative contributions of the major biochemical classes (carbohydrates, proteins, lignin, aliphatic, and carbonyls) to be inferred, facilitating functional comparisons among these biologically derived residues (Figure 2).
Normalized integrals from the NMR spectra revealed distinct chemical differences between the samples (Supplementary Materials: Table S1). Among the insect samples, G. mellonella frass displayed the highest aromaticity index (0.80) among the insect samples, driven by a notable increase in the aromatic (110–145 ppm) and phenolic (145–165 ppm) signal intensities. In contrast, the EFV exhibited a more heterogeneous and balanced spectral profile. Significant signals were detected in the alkyl (0–45 ppm), aromatic (110–160 ppm), and carbonyl (160–220 ppm) regions, which are indicative of advanced microbial reworking and humification processes [51]. These compositional differences are clearly visible in the stacked NMR spectra (Figure 2).

3.4. Biomolecular Composition

The estimated biomolecular composition derived from the NMR spectral distributions and modelled using the approach of [38], provides insights into the biochemical nature and decomposition stage of each substrate (Table 3, Supplementary Materials: Figure S1). IF samples were characterized primarily by high carbohydrate content, ranging from 58.92% in G. mellonella to 66.01% in H. illucens. This trend reflects the chitin–protein–polysaccharide matrix that is typical of insect excreta and exuviae [38]. Protein content was also substantial, ranging from 21.73% in T. molitor to 29.29% in A. domesticus, which supports their interpretation that insect-derived residues are rich in labile nitrogenous compounds. These biochemical features align with the nutrient-rich profile often attributed to insect frass, supporting their classification as readily mineralizable soil systems inputs.
Lignin content varied among the insect frass types. T. molitor exhibited the highest lignin estimate (12.98%), while H. illucens showed the lowest (4.75%). G. mellonella and A. domesticus had intermediate values (8.93% and 7.07%, respectively), possibly reflecting differences in digestive physiology or feedstock input. Aliphatic fractions were negligible or absent in all insect samples except H. illucens (3.24%) and T. molitor (2.27%), in which minor amounts were detected. Carbonyl content was generally low, except in G. mellonella (5.06%), indicating limited oxidative transformation.

3.5. Functional Group Characterization

The FTIR spectra of IFs showed distinct absorption patterns across the mid-infrared region (Figure 3), reflecting the compositional diversity and biochemical specificity of these substrates. Insect frass samples exhibited strong absorption bands in the range of 998.9 to 1073.2 cm−1. These peaks are commonly attributed to C–O–C stretching vibrations in chitin polysaccharides and P–O–C linkages in phosphate-containing biomolecules. The presence of chitin was inferred from spectroscopic signatures [52,53], rather than being directly quantified. Their presence highlights the biochemical origin of the residues, particularly the influence of chitinous exuviae and organic material derived from the insect gut. The 13C NMR spectra showed clear chemical separation between the samples (Supplementary Materials: Table S1): G. mellonella frass had the highest aromaticity index (0.80), followed by T. molitor (0.56), A. domesticus (0.51), and H. illucens (0.41), while the vermicompost from E. fetida (EFV) had an index of 0.43. FTIR analysis revealed the presence of the polysaccharide band at ~1025.9 cm−1 in all samples. The frass exhibited the amide I (~1644 cm−1) and amide II (~1532 cm−1) bands, while signals showing at 871.6 and 1414.5 cm−1 were associated with carbonates and aliphatic deformations. Furthermore, C–H stretching vibrations at 2850.3 and 2918.7 cm−1 and carbonyl bands at around 1726.9 cm−1 were detected in all samples. Estimated biomolecular partitioning indicated a lignin content of 12.98% (T. molitor), 8.93% (G. mellonella), 7.07% (A. domesticus), and 4.75% (H. illucens) in frass, and an approximate distribution of ~30% carbohydrates, ~30% proteins, 26.43% lignin, and 13.02% aliphatic fractions in EFV.

3.6. Degradability Assessment

The highest R1 value observed in the present study was in the frass from G. mellonella (0.88), followed by A. domesticus (0.79) and H. illucens (0.73). In contrast, T. molitor frass exhibited the lowest R1 value (0.50), indicating a predominance of labile, thermally volatile components, such as simple carbohydrates and proteins. The EFV presented an intermediate R1 value of 0.67, reflecting its balanced chemically composition (Figure 4, Supplementary Materials: Table S2).

3.7. Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC)

DSC complements thermogravimetric analysis by characterizing the exothermic behavior of the decomposition of organic matter under oxidative conditions. The maximum temperatures of heat release (Tmax) in two defined thermal intervals 200–400 °C (Tmax1) and 400–550 °C (Tmax2) indicate the activation energy required for the degradation of labile and recalcitrant organic fractions, respectively [29,33] (Figure 5).
The differences observed among the samples reflect variations in thermal stability and compositional features related to their biological origin and the extent of their processing. Of the insect frass samples, G. mellonella exhibited the greatest thermal resistance across both temperature ranges, with Tmax1 = 327.7 °C and Tmax2 = 549.0 °C. Consistent with this, G. mellonella also exhibited the highest R1 value (0.88) and the highest R2 value (2.55), denoting a pronounced shift in thermal decomposition towards the recalcitrant domain. The large Area2 (327.96) relative to Area1 (128.78) reinforces this interpretation, suggesting that a significant proportion of its organic matter only decomposes at elevated temperatures. In contrast, T. molitor displayed the lowest Tmax1 (297.0 °C), relatively high Tmax2 (523.7 °C), and the lowest R1 (0.50) and R2 (0.91). H. illucens frass presented the lowest Tmax1 (282.3 °C) and a moderate Tmax2 (425.0 °C), suggesting early decomposition of labile compounds with limited structural complexity. However, its relatively high Area2 (985.24) compared to Area1 (398.17) and R2 (2.47) implies that a substantial portion of its organic matter is associated with high-temperature degradation. A. domesticus exhibited intermediate thermal behavior, with Tmax1 = 302.3 °C and Tmax2 = 495.7 °C. Its Area1 (328.79) was lower than Area2 (781.22), resulting in an R2 of 2.38, which correlates well with its R1 of 0.79. For the EFV, Tmax1 and Tmax2 were 331.7 °C and 490.3 °C, respectively. The balance between Area1 (371.44) and Area2 (350.09) yielded an R2 value of 0.94, which is very similar to its R1 value of (0.67). Comparing R1 (from TGA) and R2 (from DSC) parameters across samples reveals a coherent pattern: samples with higher R2 values also tend to exhibit elevated R1 values, reflecting the dominance of late-degrading, thermally stable compounds (Supplementary Materials: Table S3).

3.8. Biological Parameters: Eco- and Phytotoxicity of IF

The ecotoxicity of the samples was assessed using the criteria outlined in [54]. This classification establishes toxicity categories according to Toxicity Units (TU): 0.4 < TU < 1, slight acute toxicity; 1 < TU < 10, acute toxicity; 10 < TU < 100 high acute toxicity. In this sense, the frass of H. illucens, 0.15 TU, presented lower ecotoxicity than that of T. molitor (1.47 TU), A. domesticus (1.28 TU), and G. mellonella (1.18 TU) (Figure 6).
IF and EFV were analyzed phytotoxicity using tests developed by [48]. In these tests, the germination percentage (%G) and root length percentage (%L) of the blank treatments (i.e., no frass or vermicompost) were obtained in order to calculate a combined parameter known as the germination index (%GI). The standardized threshold value for considering an organic material to be non-phytotoxic is 50% GI. Significant differences (p < 0.001) were observed between organism types for all three phytotoxicity indicators (Table 4). Extracts from T. molitor exhibited the most pronounced phytotoxicity, with extremely low values observed for germination (13.8%), radicular length percentage (8.8%), and, consequently, the germination index (1.3%). A. domesticus frass extract also demonstrated significant phytotoxicity, particularly inhibiting root elongation (L = 40.7%), which lead to a low germination index (28.6%). However, germination (70.3%) was less severely affected them in the case of T. molitor. By contrast, extracts from G. mellonella and H. illucens exhibited high germination percentages (99.1% and 85.4%, respectively) and radicular lengths (73.9% and 81.2%, respectively), resulting in germination index values (72.6% and 69.7%, respectively) that were well above the phytotoxicity threshold. Notably, the E. fetida vermicompost extract displayed the highest radicular length and germination index values (128% and 129% respectively).

4. Discussion

This study supports the view that insect frass (IF) is not a uniform input but rather a set of residues types that are structured by species and whose agronomic behavior emerges from distinct biochemical, ionic, and stability signatures. The contrasting species we studied (A. domesticus, H. illucens, G. mellonella, and T. molitor), align with previous reports that the properties of frass depend on the biology of the insect, the feedstock, and the processing. They also differ systematically from EFV [15,55,56,57].

4.1. IF Agronomic Properties

Across species, IF showed nutrient densities that could exceed the effective fertilizing value (particularly for A. domesticus and H. illucens. This corroborates earlier observations of comparatively high total N and exchangeable K in some IF [58,59]. In our dataset, A. domesticus reached values of approximately 6.4% N and 3.0% K, values that position this frass as a potential source of rapid-nutrition component for high-demand crops, provided application rates are synchronized with crop uptake [60,61]. However, pronounced interspecific variability was observed, underscoring that “species-agnostic” dose recommendations are not defensible [25]. In practice, IF should be formulated with explicit species resolution, considering both nutrient supply and co-factors that affect bioavailability (e.g., ionic strength and labile C).

4.2. Environmental Issues of IF

With regard to salinity risk, previous studies have reported comparable EC ranges for IF and EFV, and have clarifies the mechanisms driving EC increases during biotransformation. Consistent with our results, ref. [62] found that the EC values of frass were similar to those of vermicompost derived from farm manure (2.30–5.77 dS m−1). In our dataset, only frass from A. domesticus would pose a salinity risk. During vermicomposting, EC typically rises as earthworms and associated microbiota decompose organic matter, releasing soluble salts [63,64]. A similar pattern has been observed during the digestion of food waste by black soldier fly larvae [65,66].
Trace metal concentrations were generally low, but not negligible, and patterns were species-specific. Although EFV often carries legacy metals from manure or mixed organics [67,68], some IF—particularly A. domesticus in our study—showed comparatively higher concentrations of Cd, Pb, or Ni. The normative framework for placing insect frass on the market as fertilizer is defined by the Commission Regulation (EU) 2021/1925 and Regulation (EU) 142/2011, which specifically established microbiological criteria on frass. However, requirements on chemical contaminants, such as heavy metals, are not included in these regulations. For this, the heavy metal thresholds considered are those established for organic fertilizers (Regulation (EU) 2019/1009). According to this Regulation, the maximum permissible concentrations in the final product (on a dry matter basis) are Cd: 1.5 mg kg−1 (for amendments) and 2 mg kg−1 (for fertilizers); Cu: 300 mg kg−1 Ni: 50 mg kg−1, Pb: 120 mg kg−1, and Zn: 800 mg kg−1. When compared the IF samples with these standards, it was observed that the concentrations of heavy metals were much lower than the limit values established for the safe use of organic fertilizers (Regulation (EU) 2019/1009). Such differences are attributed to the feed substrate and mineral “carry-over” during gut passage [69,70]. From a risk perspective, these interspecific differences highlight the importance of controlling the feedstock and monitoring batch-levels to ensure that metals concentrations below agronomic thresholds and to prevent long-term soil accumulation [71,72,73]. This is consistent with the premise of the circular bioeconomy that the valorization of side streams is only sustainable when quality assurance prevents the transfer of contaminants [74].

4.3. Organic-Matter Nature of IF

The chemical milieu of IF spanned a broad C/N and pH range exhibiting clear species structure. A. domesticus exhibited a very low C/N ratio of ~5.4, which is indicative of high N availability and fast turnover. In contrast, H. illucens and T. molitor presented higher C/N ratios of >11, which is consistent with slower net mineralization [75]. The pH ranged from mildly acidic (T. molitor ≈ 5.6) to slightly alkaline (H. illucens ≈ 7.5), which is within the agronomic norms for organic amendments [67,75]. Electrical conductivity (EC) was the key differentiator: A. domesticus displayed the highest EC among the IF and EFV, consistent with reports of elevated soluble salts in certain cricket frass depending on diet and processing [15,56]. These axes (C/N, pH, and EC) interact mechanistically with thermal stability to shape early biotic responses. Low C/N accelerates N release, but when coupled with high EC it can impose osmotic stress in salt-sensitive contexts [76]. Previous studies have described the mechanisms by which black soldier frass (BSF) digestion can neutralize humic functional groups, as well as delineating safe pH–EC ranges for agricultural use. As described by [64], H. illucens has the capacity to neutralize the carboxyl and phenol groups of the humic acid by secreting calcium and ammonia in the gut during digestion. Similar behavior was also observed in earthworm composting [77]. The transformation of soybean by black soldier fly larvae frass could increase the pH from 5.7 to 8.6 in the final compost [78]. The pH values (5.5–8.5) of all IF and EFV samples remained within the suitable range for earthworm and microorganism activity [79] and for agricultural and horticultural purposes [65]. EC value is one of the key parameters that could indicate the use of organic fertilizer in agriculture without environmental risk [80].

4.4. Structural/Molecular Nature of IF vs. EFV

Spectroscopic fingerprints (13C NMR and FTIR) revealed fundamental compositional differences between IF and EFV. Normalized 13C NMR integrals revealed distinct chemical separation among the samples (Supplementary Materials: Table S1). Notably, frass from G. mellonella exhibited the highest aromaticity index (0.80), driven by elevated signals in the aromatic (110–145 ppm) and phenolic (145–165 ppm) regions. This is consistent with greater contributions from recalcitrant constituents (e.g., melanin or aromatic amino acid derivatives), which are linked to species-specific biochemistry and/or digestive processing. Conversely, EFV displayed a lower aromaticity index (0.43) relative than IF, consistent with a shift from condensed aromatic domains towards more oxidized, microbially processed compounds [81]. The offset presentation highlighted the distinct functional carbon pools across the sample set. The insect-derived residues showed narrow, carbohydrate-rich profiles with dominant signals in the O-alkyl and N-alkyl domains, whereas the EFV presented a broader spectrum, reflecting the chemical diversification typical of humified organic matter. Furthermore, applying of trapezoidal integration (trapz) improved the accuracy of regional quantification by mitigating the overestimation issues associated with simple summation approaches [82,83].
These NMR trends were corroborated by FTIR features, which further supported the compositional split between IF and EFV. IF showed stronger signatures corresponding to proteins, chitin, and labile polysaccharides, whereas EFV reflected a more transformed, oxidized and microbially reworked matrix. Notably, certain insect-specific bands were absent in EFV, highlighting the distinct distribution of functional-group distribution. The ~1026 cm−1 band (C–O stretch in cellulose/hemicellulose) was sharper and more intense in frass, which is consistent with lower degrees of microbial alteration. The amide I (~1644 cm−1) and amide II (~1532 cm−1) were more pronounced in frass, indicating the presence of peptide bonds and residual protein. This is consistent with the NMR evidence for nitrogenous biopolymers. Although carbonyl bands near 1727 cm−1 appeared in all samples, implicating oxidative formation of partially degraded intermediates, the signal was stronger in G. mellonella, suggesting higher levels of oxidized carbon. Conversely, C–H stretching intensities at 2850/2919 cm−1 were lower in IF than in EFV, consistent with the comparatively reduced aliphatic fractions quantified by NMR. Across IF types, biomolecular partitions differed. T. molitor showed the highest lignin estimate (12.98%), H. illucens the lowest (4.75%) and G. mellonella and A. domesticus showed intermediate values (8.93% and 7.07% respectively). Aliphatic content was negligible across all frass samples, except for minor fractions in H. illucens (3.24%) and T. molitor (2.27%). Carbonyl content was generally low, with a higher proportion in G. mellonella (5.06%), indicating limited but detectable oxidative transformation.
In parallel, NMR region integrals revealed polysaccharide- and chitin-rich signatures and varying aromaticity across IF (e.g., T. molitor 0.56, A. domesticus 0.51, H. illucens 0.41), indicative of relatively condensed molecular structures frequently associated with more recalcitrant organic matter pools [84]. By contrast, EFV displayed a more balanced molecular distribution of ~30% carbohydrates, ~30% proteins, 26.43% lignin, and 13.02% aliphatic, indicative of a highly processed, stabilized matrix consistent with advanced humification and microbial transformation. A distribution of ~5.6% carbonyls further supports oxidative restructuring during compost maturation. Taken together, these molecular patterns highlight the functional differences between IF and EFV.
Frass represents labile, nutrient-dense inputs suited to rapid mineralization and short-term fertilization, whereas vermicompost acts as a reservoir of chemically stabilized organic matter, which has implications for soil C sequestration and long-term fertility. This organism-linked partitioning-simpler residues from insect digestion versus chemically diversified, microbially stabilized matrices from vermicompost is central for tailoring amendment strategies (nutrient supply versus carbon stabilization).

4.5. Methodological Considerations and Broader Implications

The successful application of the model to these substrates reinforces its utility for estimating gross molecular composition from 13C NMR data [38]. By partitioning signals into biologically relevant domains (alkyl, O-alkyl, aromatic and carbonyl), the model provides a practical link between spectra and function. The close match between the predicted and observed spectral distributions reported in previous studies of fresh residues, composts, and humified materials supports the robustness of the model and justifies its use for IF-EFV comparisons in this study [30]. More broadly, our interpretation aligns with the contemporary view that soil and compost organic matter are best conceptualized as ensembles of identifiable molecular components, rather than as classical “humic substances” [51,85]. This perspective explains why species identity and process history result in coherent, mechanistically interpretable differences in IF, and why, after intensive microbial processing, EFV converges towards more humified, functionally stable signatures.

4.6. Evaluation of Spectral Figures

The stacked 13C NMR spectra (Figure 2) visually corroborate the quantitative integrals and model estimates. Offset plots clearly separate polysaccharide-rich IF from more aromatic/oxidized substrates (e.g., humus and manures), and the annotated functional regions emphasize shifts in signal density across the O-alkyl (carbohydrate), alkyl (lipid/chitin), aromatic (lignin- and melanin-like), and carbonyl domains. This visualization was instrumental in interpreting structural transformation along the labile-recalcitrant continuum. Using trapezoidal numerical integration to compute regional integrals improved comparability among spectra by minimizing bias relative to simple summation, thereby refining cross-sample contrasts in a way that is consistent with best practice in solid-state NMR quantification [50,86]. Complementing the NMR-based interpretation, FTIR features of the EFV further corroborated its advanced humification state. The EFV spectrum showed distinct bands at ~871.6 and ~1414.5 cm−1, which are consistent with carbonate (CO32−) groups and aliphatic CH2/CH3 deformations, respectively. These are signals that are typical of humified organic matter and are indicative of extensive biochemical processing and structural rearrangement [87,88,89]. Additionally, the relative weakness of amide bands, particularly near ~1530 and ~1630 cm−1, suggests advanced degradation of proteinaceous material, a hallmark of mature composts [90].

4.7. Degradability and Thermal Stability (R1, R2 Continuum)

Calorimetric–thermal indices captured a stability continuum closely tied to species identity. G. mellonella and A. domesticus concentrated a larger fraction of mass/enthalpy in high-temperature domains (higher R1 and/or R2), indicating thermally recalcitrant pools and slower degradation. T. molitor showed a low R1 (~0.50), consistent with a labile matrix prone to rapid biodegradation. The EFV exhibited intermediate stability, consistent with its humified nature [69,91]. However, differences between Tmax1 and Tmax2, together with the relative exothermic areas (Area2/Area1), refine the interpretation of compound classes. In G. mellonella, higher Tmax and R2 indicate structurally complex, recalcitrant fractions, whereas in the EFV, they are more consistent with microbially humified material. These findings emphasize the complementary roles of TGA and DSC in assessing organic-matter stability. R1 serves as a rapid indicator of recalcitrance, while R2 and Tmax provide mechanistic insight into the energy requirements and compositional drivers of thermal resistance. In T. molitor, a high Tmax2 implies that some structural components resist thermal degradation; however, the predominance of heat release at lower temperatures (Area1 = 604.57; Area2 = 551.67) indicates a labile composition dominated by easily oxidizable compounds, which is consistent with its classification as a nutrient-rich but rapidly mineralizable input. Together, these thermal parameters form a diagnostic framework with which to distinguish the functional maturity and ecological roles of insect-derived residues versus composted materials. Such materials may resist microbial mineralization, resulting in slow-release behavior and longer residence times in the soil. Conversely, the low R1 of T. molitor supports its use as a fast-acting amendment in nutrient-limited systems. Positioning EFV within this continuum clarifies its intermediate R1. EFV contains both labile and recalcitrant fractions, reflecting biochemical heterogeneity and microbial humification. Unlike IF, which often retains native biopolymers, EFV stabilized through microbial transformation and oxidative restructuring. This ordering mirrors spectroscopic contrasts and links composition to function: G. mellonella is conditioner-like, T. molitor is fast-mineralizing, A. domesticus is mixed but influenced by ionic strength and H. illucens is partially stabilized with a notable high-temperature fraction [50,87]. For A. domesticus, this pattern suggests a substantial fraction of thermally recalcitrant organic matter, reinforcing its classification as a moderately stabilized substrate. However, it is important to note that high R-indices alone do not equate to agronomic “maturity”: condensed yet biologically inert domains can increase thermal recalcitrance without alleviating short-term plant stressors if EC or low-MW acids remain elevated [92,93,94]. Therefore, R1 is most informative when considered alongside chemical and microbial indicators. A high R1 does not necessarily indicate compost maturity, and a lower R1 (as observed in T. molitor) may suggest greater biodegradability despite reduced thermal resistance [95,96,97].

4.8. Eco- and Phytotoxicity

Bioassays translated the above chemistry into integrated biological signals. T. molitor and A. domesticus extracts exhibited strongly phytotoxic (GI < 30%), which is consistent with (i) the high labile-C pressure and ammonium/organic acid loads in T. molitor and (ii) the soluble salts/ionic stress in A. domesticus. By contrast, H. illucens and G. mellonella were non-phytotoxic under the same extract conditions, and EFV consistently exhibited the highest %GI, consistent with its maturity. As some materials intended for biofertilizer formulations were found to inhibited germination and/or root elongation, dilution assays were performed to quantify attenuation of these effects and derive practical guidelines for product design. Across diluted and undiluted extracts, %GI increased with dilution for all materials, especially for T. molitor and A. domesticus, to a lesser extent for H. illucens frass, and not significantly for E. fetida. For T. molitor, GI reached 50.7% at a dilution of 1:2 and 67.1% at a dilution of 1:5 (from an initial baseline of ~1%), indicating a strong dose-dependent effect. Ecotoxicity (TU) was low overall, but highest in T. molitor (approximately 1.47 TU), which aligns with a labile, oxygen-demanding matrix. Although TU values were not high, they should be considered when making recommendations for use; dilution or blending reduces the risk of acute toxicity. In practice, dilution improved %GI in all scenarios. Based on the phytotoxicity-limiting factor, it is advisable to include. T. molitor frass at a concentration of 20–30% in blends. In general, the participation of IF in complex formulations at >20% may induce phytotoxicity; however, combining it with phytostimulant materials could allow for a higher inclusion without significant risk. EFV can function as a buffering component to reduce overall phytotoxicity in frass-derived biofertilizers. Extending to seed bioassays, %GI effectively highlights risk. T. molitor and A. domesticus should be considered phytotoxic, and their inclusion rates should be optimized in future formulations. The remaining materials did not exhibit show phytotoxic effects under the tested conditions. EFV demonstrated the highest %GI, reinforcing its role as a maturity reference and blending partner. Furthermore, several studies report improved crop production and physiological status when these products are applied, emphasizing the importance of dosage and formulation when translating phytotoxicity/ecotoxicity into agricultural practice.

4.9. An Integrated Framework

This study reveals a three-axis framework: (1) EC (electrical conductivity) modulates osmotic/ionic stress; (2) the availability of labile-C, e.g., DOC, as proxied by C/N and low-T exotherms, governs short-term microbial O2 and N dynamics; and (3) structural stability (R1/R2, aromaticity) sets the tempo of carbon turnover. The results clearly differentiate IF from the EFV, highlighting distinct molecular features and potential agronomic roles. High levels of labile organic matter can restrict the agricultural use of frass, particularly that from Tenebrio larvae. Ref. [98] reported that applying immature compost with high labile-C content to soil induces a rapid increase in microbial activity, which can enhance the mineralization of native soil organic matter or even lead to microbial N sequestration. Fulvic and humic carbon values in insect frass were higher values than in EFV, which could increase the economic value of this material as a fertilizer. Mapping IF onto this space explains both interspecific ranking and its divergence from EFV, reconciling heterogeneous findings across prior studies by making species identity and process history explicit [56,57]. Within the broader circular bioeconomy context, this species-resolved view clarifies how IF can complement—rather than replace—composted amendments. IF provides targeted nutrient release, while EFV/humified inputs supply structural stability [73,74].

4.10. Future Research Directions

Two potential future lines of research could be: (i) species-specific dose–response trials under different soil conditions (e.g., texture and salinity levels) to study the relationship of EC/DOC/R (electrical conductivity/dissolved organic carbon/respiration) indices with soil characteristics or processes over time; and (ii) studies related to feedstock and post-processing to adjust the balance between rapid nutrient release and biosafety [72,73].

5. Conclusions

The insect frass that has been studied are not uniform products; their agronomic properties, composition, stability, and associated risks can vary significantly depending on the species. A. domesticus frass is rich in N, P, and K and it exhibits high electrical conductivity. T. molitor frass contains high levels of labile organic carbon and can be phytotoxic. Frass from G. mellonella and H. illucens were non-phytotoxic; the former was notable for its high thermal stability and the latter for its lowest ecotoxicity. Structurally, frass is minimally processed organic matter that is rich in carbohydrates and proteins, making it a fast-acting fertilizer. In contrast, vermicompost is a stable, humified and stable matrix that functions as a long-term soil conditioner. Therefore, the direct or uncontrolled application of T. molitor and A. domesticus frass is not recommended due to the risk of phytotoxicity risks. To validate new by-products from insect farms as safe and effective biofertilizers, field trials or soil-based trials need to be conducted. However, based on laboratory indicators, the most effective strategy to avoid phytotoxic responses is to formulate blends by combining this frass in controlled proportions with stabilizing materials, such as E. fetida vermicompost. This synergy could enable rapid nutrient release from the frass, while mitigating toxicity risks and improving long-term soil health. This would transform an industrial by-product into a safe and effective biofertilizer.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/insects17020142/s1, Table S1. Normalized integrals of 13C CP-MAS NMR spectral regions for insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples. Table S2. Mass loss percentages and R1 values of insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples, as derived from thermogravimetric analysis. Mass loss was calculated for temperature intervals of 200–400 °C and 400–550 °C, which correspond to the decomposition of distinct organic fractions. Table S3. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) peak temperatures, exothermic areas and R2 values for insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples. Figure S1. Estimated biomolecular composition of organic carbon in each sample, derived from solid-state 13C CP-MAS NMR spectra using the mixing model [30]. The stacked bar chart illustrates the proportionate contributions of carbohydrates, proteins, lignin, aliphatic compounds, and carbonyl structures to the total organic carbon content. Variations between samples reflect differences in biochemical origin, degree of decomposition, and organic matter transformation pathways.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.M., P.B. and H.E.-M.; methodology, R.M., M.Á.B. and A.M.-S.; software, F.C.M.-E. and J.A.S.-T.; validation, F.C.M.-E. and M.J.L.; formal analysis, P.C., F.J.A.-R. and L.O.; investigation E.M.-S. and J.A.S.-T.; resources, F.J.A.-R. and M.J.L.; data curation, F.C.M.-E.; writing—original draft preparation, J.A.S.-T., H.E.-M. and F.C.M.-E.; writing—review and editing, L.O., R.M. and F.C.M.-E.; visualization, P.B.; supervision, M.J.L. and R.M.; project administration, F.J.A.-R., M.J.L. and R.M.; funding acquisition, M.J.L. and R.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funding from the Bio-Based Industries Joint Undertaking (JU) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under grant agreement No. 887648—RECOVER project. The JU receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme and the Bio-Based Industries Consortium.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article/Supplementary Materials. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
IFInsect frass
EFVEisenia fetida vermicompost
GIGermination index
EC50Effective concentration 50%
TUToxicity units
NMRNuclear magnetic resonance
CP-MASCross-polarization magic angle spinning
FTIRFourier-transform infrared spectroscopy
ATRAttenuated total reflection
TGThermogravimetry
DTGDerivative thermogravimetry
TGAThermogravimetric analysis
DSCDifferential scanning calorimetry
TmaxTemperature of maximum signal
Tmax1Temperature of first maximum signal
Tmax2Temperature of second maximum signal
R1Thermal stability ratio (mass loss 400–550 °C/200–400 °C)
R2Calorimetric ratio (DSC Area2/Area1)
ECElectrical conductivity
OMOrganic matter
DOCDissolved organic carbon
CHACarbon in humic acids
CFACarbon in fulvic acids
TOMTotal organic matter
TNTotal nitrogen
TOCTotal organic carbon
NaOHSodium hydroxide
ICP-OESInductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectrometry
%GGermination percentage
%LRoot length percentage
%GIGermination index percentage

References

  1. Raheem, D.; Carrascosa, C.; Oluwole, O.B.; Nieuwland, M.; Saraiva, A.; Millán, R.; Raposo, A. Traditional Consumption of and Rearing Edible Insects in Africa, Asia and Europe. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2019, 59, 2169–2188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rowe, A. Insects Raised for Food and Feed-Global Scale, Practices, and Policy. 2020. Available online: https://rethinkpriorities.org/publications/insects-raised-for-food-and-feed (accessed on 15 December 2025).
  3. Desbois, A.P.; Coote, P.J. Wax Moth Larva (Galleria mellonella): An in Vivo Model for Assessing the Efficacy of Antistaphylococcal Agents. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2011, 66, 1785–1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Yue, H.; Hu, J.; Guan, G.; Tao, L.; Du, H.; Li, H.; Huang, G. Discovery of the Gray Phenotype and White-Gray-Opaque Tristable Phenotypic Transitions in Candida dubliniensis. Virulence 2016, 7, 230–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Govorushko, S. Global Status of Insects as Food and Feed Source: A Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 91, 436–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Gautam, A.; Gyawali, I.; Poudel, S.; Devkota, S.; Acharya, R.; Kandel, M.; Subedi, D. Insects as Food and Feed Source: A Comprehensive Review on Nutritional Value, Food Safety Concern, Environmental Benefits, Economic Potential, Technological Innovations, Challenges, and Future Prospects. Food Front. 2025, 6, 2591–2646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Prakoso, V.A.; Irawan, A.; Iswantari, A.; Maulana, F.; Samsudin, R.; Jayanegara, A. Evaluation of Dietary Inclusion of Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens) Larvae on Fish Production Performance: A Meta-Analysis. J. Insects Food Feed 2022, 8, 1373–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Tinder, A.C.; Puckett, R.T.; Turner, N.D.; Cammack, J.A.; Tomberlin, J.K. Bioconversion of Sorghum and Cowpea by Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens (L.)) Larvae for Alternative Protein Production. J. Insects Food Feed 2017, 3, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wang, Y.S.; Shelomi, M. Review of Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens) as Animal Feed and Human Food. Foods 2017, 6, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Junqueira, J.C. Galleria mellonella as a Model Host for Human Pathogens: Recent Studies and New Perspectives. Virulence 2012, 3, 474–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kavanagh, K.; Fallon, J.P. Galleria mellonella Larvae as Models for Studying Fungal Virulence. Fungal Biol. Rev. 2010, 24, 79–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Phillips, T.W.; Throne, J.E. Biorational Approaches to Managing Stored-Product Insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2010, 55, 375–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zunzunegui, I.; Martín-García, J.; Santamaría, Ó.; Poveda, J. Analysis of Yellow Mealworm (Tenebrio molitor) Frass as a Resource for a Sustainable Agriculture in the Current Context of Insect Farming Industry Growth. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 460, 142608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Gärttling, D.; Schulz, H. Compilation of Black Soldier Fly Frass Analyses. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2021, 22, 937–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Beesigamukama, D.; Subramanian, S.; Tanga, C.M. Nutrient Quality and Maturity Status of Frass Fertilizer from Nine Edible Insects. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 7182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Beesigamukama, D.; Mochoge, B.; Korir, N.; Musyoka, M.W.; Fiaboe, K.K.M.; Nakimbugwe, D.; Khamis, F.M.; Subramanian, S.; Dubois, T.; Ekesi, S.; et al. Nitrogen Fertilizer Equivalence of Black Soldier Fly Frass Fertilizer and Synchrony of Nitrogen Mineralization for Maize Production. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Beesigamukama, D.; Mochoge, B.; Korir, N.K.; Fiaboe, K.K.M.; Nakimbugwe, D.; Khamis, F.M.; Subramanian, S.; Dubois, T.; Musyoka, M.W.; Ekesi, S. Exploring Black Soldier Fly Frass as Novel Fertilizer for Improved Growth, Yield, and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Maize Under Field Conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 574592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Cappellozza, S.; Leonardi, M.G.; Savoldelli, S.; Carminati, D.; Rizzolo, A.; Cortellino, G.; Terova, G.; Moretto, E.; Badaile, A.; Concheri, G.; et al. A First Attempt to Produce Proteins from Insects by Means of a Circular Economy. Animals 2019, 9, 278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Poveda, J. Insect Frass in the Development of Sustainable Agriculture. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2021, 41, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gligorescu, A.; Macavei, L.I.; Larsen, B.F.; Markfoged, R.; Fischer, C.H.; Koch, J.D.; Jensen, K.; Lau Heckmann, L.H.; Nørgaard, J.V.; Maistrello, L. Pilot Scale Production of Hermetia illucens (L.) Larvae and Frass Using Former Foodstuffs. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2022, 10, 100546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Fuertes-Mendizábal, T.; Salcedo, I.; Huérfano, X.; Riga, P.; Estavillo, J.M.; Ávila Blanco, D.; Duñabeitia, M.K. Mealworm Frass as a Potential Organic Fertilizer in Synergy with PGP-Based Biostimulant for Lettuce Plants. Agronomy 2023, 13, 1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Sawinska, Z.; Radzikowska-Kujawska, D.; Kowalczewski, P.Ł.; Grzanka, M.; Sobiech, Ł.; Skrzypczak, G.; Drożdżyńska, A.; Ślachciński, M.; Świtek, S. Hermetia illucens Frass Fertilization: A Novel Approach for Enhancing Lettuce Resilience and Photosynthetic Efficiency under Drought Stress Conditions. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 2386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Safitri, R.A.; Vandeweyer, D.; Deruytter, D.; Meijer, N.; Coudron, C.L.; Banach, J.L.; van der Fels-Klerx, H.J. Exploring Potential Uses of Insect Frass for Agricultural Production Considering Its Nutrients, and Chemical and Microbiological Safety. J. Insects Food Feed 2024, 11, 167–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Zheng, K.; Zeng, Z.; Tian, Q.; Huang, J.; Zhong, Q.; Huo, X. Epidemiological Evidence for the Effect of Environmental Heavy Metal Exposure on the Immune System in Children. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 868, 161691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Schrögel, P.; Wätjen, W. Insects for Food and Feed-Safety Aspects Related to Mycotoxins and Metals. Foods 2019, 8, 288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Lomonaco, G.; Franco, A.; De Smet, J.; Scieuzo, C.; Salvia, R.; Falabella, P. Larval Frass of Hermetia illucens as Organic Fertilizer: Composition and Beneficial Effects on Different Crops. Insects 2024, 15, 293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Tsochatzis, E.D.; Berggreen, I.E.; Vidal, N.P.; Roman, L.; Gika, H.; Corredig, M. Cellular Lipids and Protein Alteration during Biodegradation of Expanded Polystyrene by Mealworm Larvae under Different Feeding Conditions. Chemosphere 2022, 300, 134420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tsochatzis, E.D.; Berggreen, I.E.; Nørgaard, J.V.; Theodoridis, G.; Dalsgaard, T.K. Biodegradation of Expanded Polystyrene by Mealworm Larvae under Different Feeding Strategies Evaluated by Metabolic Profiling Using GC-TOF-MS. Chemosphere 2021, 281, 130840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hénault-Ethier, L.; Quinche, M.; Reid, B.; Hotte, N.; Fortin, A.; Normandin, É.; de La Rochelle Renaud, G.; Rasooli Zadeh, A.; Deschamps, M.H.; Vandenberg, G. Opportunities and Challenges in Upcycling Agri-Food Byproducts to Generate Insect Manure (Frass): A Literature Review. Waste Manag. 2024, 176, 169–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bloukounon-Goubalan, A.Y.; Saïdou, A.; Clottey, V.A.; Coulibaly, K.; Erokotan, N.; Obognon, N.; Chabi, F.; Chrysostome, C.A.A.M. By-Products of Insect Rearing: Insect Residues as Biofertilizers. In Insects as Animal Feed: Novel Ingredients for Use in Pet, Aquaculture and Livestock Diets; CABI: Wallingford, UK, 2021; pp. 60–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Arabzadeh, G.; Delisle-Houde, M.; Vandenberg, G.W.; Deschamps, M.H.; Dorais, M.; Derome, N.; Tweddell, R.J. Suppressive Effect of Black Soldier Fly Larvae Frass on Fusarium Wilt Disease in Tomato Plants. Insects 2024, 15, 613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kisaakye, J.; Beesigamukama, D.; Haukeland, S.; Subramanian, S.; Thiongo, P.K.; Kelemu, S.; Tanga, C.M. Chitin-Enriched Insect Frass Fertilizer as a Biorational Alternative for Root-Knot Nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) Management. Front. Plant Sci. 2024, 15, 1361739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Watson, C.; Leal, H.; Wichern, F. Urease Inhibition Stimulates Fungal Degradation of Chitin in Frass-Amended Soil. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2025, 188, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Amorim, H.C.S.; Ashworth, A.J.; Arsi, K.; Rojas, M.G.; Morales-Ramos, J.A.; Donoghue, A.; Robinson, K. Insect Frass Composition and Potential Use as an Organic Fertilizer in Circular Economies. J. Econ. Entomol. 2024, 117, 1261–1268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Smidt, E.; Böhm, K.; Schwanninger, M. The Application of FT-IR Spectroscopy in Waste Management. In Fourier Transforms—New Analytical Approaches and FTIR Strategies; Nikolic, G., Ed.; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2011; pp. 405–430. [Google Scholar]
  36. Carballo, T.; Gil, M.V.; Gómez, X.; González-Andrés, F.; Morán, A. Characterization of Different Compost Extracts Using Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Thermal Analysis. Biodegradation 2008, 19, 815–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Martín, A.P.S.; Marhuenda-Egea, F.C.; Bustamante, M.A.; Curaqueo, G. Spectroscopy Techniques for Monitoring the Composting Process: A Review. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Nelson, P.N.; Baldock, J.A. Estimating the Molecular Composition of a Diverse Range of Natural Organic Materials from Solid-State 13C NMR and Elemental Analyses. Biogeochemistry 2005, 72, 1–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Baffi, C.; Dell’Abate, M.T.; Nassisi, A.; Silva, S.; Benedetti, A.; Genevini, P.L.; Adani, F. Determination of Biological Stability in Compost: A Comparison of Methodologies. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2007, 39, 1284–1293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dell’Abate, M.T.; Tittarelli, F. Monitoring of a Composting Process: Thermal Stability of Raw Materials and Products. In Microbiology of Composting; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; pp. 357–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Dell’Abate, M.T.; Canali, S.; Trinchera, A.; Benedetti, A.; Sequi, P. Thermal Analysis in the Evaluation of Compost Stability: A Comparison with Humification Parameters. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 1998, 51, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Dulaurent, A.M.; Daoulas, G.; Faucon, M.P.; Houben, D. Earthworms (Lumbricus terrestris L.) Mediate the Fertilizing Effect of Frass. Agronomy 2020, 10, 783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Praeg, N.; Klammsteiner, T. Primary Study on Frass Fertilizers from Mass-Reared Insects: Species Variation, Heat Treatment Effects, and Implications for Soil Application at Laboratory Scale. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 356, 120622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Salomon, M.J.; Cavagnaro, T.R.; Burton, R.A. Potential of Black Soldier Fly Larvae Frass (BSFL) as a Novel Fertilizer: Impacts on Tomato Growth, Nutrient Uptake, and Mycorrhizal Formation. Plant Soil 2025, 513, 417–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mostafaie, A.; Silva, A.R.R.; Pinto, J.N.; Prodana, M.; Lopes, I.G.; Murta, D.; Brooks, B.W.; Loureiro, S.; Cardoso, D.N. Towards Circularity for Agro-Waste: Minimal Soil Hazards of Olive Pomace Bioconverted Frass by Insect Larvae as an Organic Fertilizer. J. Environ. Manag. 2025, 375, 124151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Rubio, P.; Todolí, J.; Martínez-Sánchez, A.; Rojo, S. Evolution of the mineral concentration and bioaccumulation of the black soldier fly, Hermetia illucens, feeding on two different larval media. J. Insect Food Feed 2022, 8, 367–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sánchez-Monedero, M.A.; Cegarra, J.; García, D.; Roig, A. Chemical and Structural Evolution of Humic Acids during Organic Waste Composting. Biodegradation 2002, 13, 361–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zucconi, F.; Pera, A.; Forte, M.; De Bertoldi, M. Evaluating Toxicity of Immature Compost. Biocycle 1981, 22, 54–57. [Google Scholar]
  49. UNE-EN ISO 11348-3:2009; Water Quality—Determination of the Inhibitory Effect of Water Samples on the Light Emission of Vibrio fischeri (Luminescent bacteria Test). Part 3: Method Using Freeze-Dried Bacteria. AENOR: Madrid, Spain, 2009.
  50. Smidt, E.; Meissl, K. The Applicability of Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR) Spectroscopy in Waste Management. Waste Manag. 2007, 27, 268–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Kögel-Knabner, I. Analytical Approaches for Characterizing Soil Organic Matter. Org. Geochem. 2000, 31, 609–625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Rinaudo, M. Chitin and Chitosan: Properties and Applications. Prog. Polym. Sci. 2006, 31, 603–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Kumari, S.; Kishor, R. Chitin and Chitosan: Origin, Properties, and Applications. In Handbook of Chitin and Chitosan: Volume 1: Preparation and Properties; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Persoone, G.; Marsalek, B.; Blinova, I.; Törökne, A.; Zarina, D.; Manusadzianas, L.; Nalecz-Jawecki, G.; Tofan, L.; Stepanova, N.; Tothova, L.; et al. A Practical and User-Friendly Toxicity Classification System with Microbiotests for Natural Waters and Wastewaters. Environ. Toxicol. 2003, 18, 395–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Lazcano, C.; Domínguez, J. The Use of Vermicompost in Sustainable Agriculture: Impact on Plant Growth and Soil Fertility. In Soil Nutrients; Miransari, M., Ed.; Nova Science Publishers: Hauppauge, NY, USA, 2011; pp. 230–254. [Google Scholar]
  56. Klammsteiner, T.; Turan, V.; Juárez, M.F.D.; Oberegger, S.; Insam, H. Suitability of Black Soldier Fly Frass as Soil Amendment and Implication for Organic Waste Hygienization. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Barragan-Fonseca, K.B.; Dicke, M.; van Loon, J.J.A. Nutritional Value of the Black Soldier Fly (Hermetia illucens L.) and Its Suitability as Animal Feed—A Review. J. Insects Food Feed 2017, 3, 105–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ashworth, A.J.; Amorim, H.C.S.; Drescher, G.L.; Moore, P.A.; Rojas, M.G.; Morales-Ramos, J.; Donoghue, A.M. Insect Frass Fertilizer as Soil Amendment for Improved Forage and Soil Health in Circular Systems. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 3024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Houben, D.; Daoulas, G.; Faucon, M.P.; Dulaurent, A.M. Potential Use of Mealworm Frass as a Fertilizer: Impact on Crop Growth and Soil Properties. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 4659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Diener, S. Valorisation of Organic Solid Waste Using the Black Soldier Fly, Hermetia illucens, in Low and Middle-Income Countries. Ph.D. Thesis, ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland, 2010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Delin, S.; Engström, L. Timing of Organic Fertiliser Application to Synchronise Nitrogen Supply with Crop Demand. Acta Agric. Scand. B Soil Plant Sci. 2010, 60, 78–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Alidadi, H.; Najafpoor, A.A.; Hosseinzadeh, A.; Dolatabadi Takabi, M.; Esmaili, H.; Zanganeh, J.; Piranloo, F.G. Waste Recycling by Vermicomposting: Maturity and Quality Assessment via Dehydrogenase Enzyme Activity, Lignin, Water Soluble Carbon, Nitrogen, Phosphorous and Other Indicators. J. Environ. Manag. 2016, 182, 134–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Hait, S.; Tare, V. Optimizing Vermistabilization of Waste Activated Sludge Using Vermicompost as Bulking Material. Waste Manag. 2011, 31, 502–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Yadav, A.; Garg, V.K. Biotransformation of Bakery Industry Sludge into Valuable Product Using Vermicomposting. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 274, 512–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Liu, T.; Awasthi, M.K.; Awasthi, S.K.; Duan, Y.; Zhang, Z. Effects of Black Soldier Fly Larvae (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) on Food Waste and Sewage Sludge Composting. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 256, 109967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Liu, T.; Awasthi, S.K.; Qin, S.; Liu, H.; Awasthi, M.K.; Zhou, Y.; Jiao, M.; Pandey, A.; Varjani, S.; Zhang, Z. Conversion Food Waste and Sawdust into Compost Employing Black Soldier Fly Larvae (Diptera: Stratiomyidae) under the Optimized Condition. Chemosphere 2021, 272, 129931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Atiyeh, R.M.; Arancon, N.; Edwards, C.A.; Metzger, J.D. Influence of Earthworm-Processed Pig Manure on the Growth and Yield of Greenhouse Tomatoes. Bioresour. Technol. 2000, 75, 175–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Bernal, M.P.; Alburquerque, J.A.; Moral, R. Composting of Animal Manures and Chemical Criteria for Compost Maturity Assessment. A Review. Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 5444–5453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Poma, G.; Yin, S.; Tang, B.; Fujii, Y.; Cuykx, M.; Covaci, A. Occurrence of Selected Organic Contaminants in Edible Insects and Assessment of Their Chemical Safety. Environ. Health Perspect. 2019, 127, 127009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Meijer, N.; Nijkamp, M.M.; Schmitt, E.; van Loon, J.J.A. Chemical Food Safety of Using Former Foodstuffs for Rearing Black Soldier Fly Larvae (Hermetia illucens) for Feed and Food Use. J. Insects Food Feed 2020, 6, 475–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Smetana, S.; Schmitt, E.; Mathys, A. Sustainable Use of Hermetia illucens Insect Biomass for Feed and Food: Attributional and Consequential Life Cycle Assessment. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019, 144, 285–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Broeckx, L.; Frooninckx, L.; Slegers, L.; Berrens, S.; Noyens, I.; Goossens, S.; Verheyen, G.; Wuyts, A.; Van Miert, S. Growth of Black Soldier Fly Larvae Reared on Organic Side-Streams. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12953. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. European Commission. Regulation (EU) 2019/1009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2019 Laying Down Rules on the Making Available on the Market of EU Fertilising Products. Off. J. Eur. Union 2019, 170, 1–114. [Google Scholar]
  74. Parodi, A.; Leip, A.; De Boer, I.J.M.; Slegers, P.M.; Ziegler, F.; Temme, E.H.M.; Herrero, M.; Tuomisto, H.; Valin, H.; Van Middelaar, C.E.; et al. The Potential of Future Foods for Sustainable and Healthy Diets. Nat. Sustain. 2018, 1, 782–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Kaye, J.P.; Hart, S.C. Competition for Nitrogen between Plants and Soil Microorganisms. Trends Ecol. Evol. 1997, 12, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Warman, P.R. Evaluation of Seed Germination and Growth Tests for Assessing Compost Maturity. Compost Sci. Util. 1999, 7, 33–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Sharma, K.; Garg, V.K. Comparative Analysis of Vermicompost Quality Produced from Rice Straw and Paper Waste Employing Earthworm Eisenia fetida (Sav.). Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 250, 708–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Rehman, K.; Rehman, A.; Cai, M.; Zheng, L.; Xiao, X.; Somroo, A.A.; Wang, H.; Li, W.; Yu, Z.; Zhang, J. Conversion of Mixtures of Dairy Manure and Soybean Curd Residue by Black Soldier Fly Larvae (Hermetia illucens L.). J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 154, 366–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Popescu, I.S.; Covaliu-Mierlă, C.I.; Niculescu, V.C.; Șandru, C. Home Composting: A Sustainable Solution at Community Level. Sustainability 2025, 17, 3368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lopes, I.G.; Yong, J.W.; Lalander, C. Frass derived from black soldier fly larvae treatment of biodegradable wastes. A critical review and future perspectives. Waste Manag. 2022, 142, 65–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Baldock, J.A.; Smernik, R.J. Chemical Composition and Bioavailability of Thermally Altered Pinus resinosa (Red Pine) Wood. Org. Geochem. 2002, 33, 1093–1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Skjemstad, J.O.; Clarke, P.; Taylor, J.A.; Oades, J.M.; McClure, S.G. The Chemistry and Nature of Protected Carbon in Soil. Aust. J. Soil Res. 1996, 34, 251–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Skjemstad, J.O.; Waters, A.G.; Hanna, J.V.; Oades, J.M. Genesis of Podzols on Coastal Dunes in Southern Queensland.I.V. Nature of the Organic Fraction as Seen by 13C Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy. Aust. J. Soil Res. 1992, 30, 667–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Smernik, R.J.; Oades, J.M. The Use of Spin Counting for Determining Quantitation in Solid State 13C NMR Spectra of Natural Organic Matter 2. HF-Treated Soil Fractions. Geoderma 2000, 96, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Lehmann, J.; Kleber, M. The Contentious Nature of Soil Organic Matter. Nature 2015, 7580, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Tambone, F.; Scaglia, B.; D’Imporzano, G.; Schievano, A.; Orzi, V.; Salati, S.; Adani, F. Assessing Amendment and Fertilizing Properties of Digestates from Anaerobic Digestion through a Comparative Study with Digested Sludge and Compost. Chemosphere 2010, 81, 577–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Margenot, A.J.; Parikh, S.J.; Calderón, F.J. Fourier-Transform Infrared Spectroscopy for Soil Organic Matter Analysis. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2023, 87, 1503–1528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Ukalska-Jaruga, A.; Bejger, R.; Debaene, G.; Smreczak, B. Characterization of Soil Organic Matter Individual Fractions (Fulvic Acids, Humic Acids, and Humins) by Spectroscopic and Electrochemical Techniques in Agricultural Soils. Agronomy 2021, 11, 1067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Machado, W.; Franchini, J.C.; de Fátima Guimarães, M.; Filho, J.T. Spectroscopic Characterization of Humic and Fulvic Acids in Soil Aggregates, Brazil. Heliyon 2020, 6, e04078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Nebbioso, A.; Piccolo, A. Molecular Characterization of Dissolved Organic Matter (DOM): A Critical Review. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013, 405, 109–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Tiquia, S.M. Microbiological Parameters as Indicators of Compost Maturity. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2005, 99, 816–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Hsu, J.H.; Lo, S.L. Chemical and Spectroscopic Analysis of Organic Matter Transformations during Composting of Pig Manure. Environ. Pollut. 1999, 104, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Tiquia, S.M. Reduction of Compost Phytotoxicity during the Process of Decomposition. Chemosphere 2010, 79, 506–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Doña-Grimaldi, V.M.; Palma, A.; Ruiz-Montoya, M.; Morales, E.; Díaz, M.J. Energetic Valorization of MSW Compost Valorization by Selecting the Maturity Conditions. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 238, 153–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Siddiqui, S.; Alamri, S.; Al Rumman, S.; Al-Kahtani, M.A.; Meghvansi, M.K.; Jeridi, M.; Shumail, T.; Moustafa, M. Recent Advances in Assessing the Maturity and Stability of Compost. In Biology of Composts. Soil Biology; Meghvansi, M., Varma, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; Volume 58, pp. 181–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Wichuk, K.M.; McCartney, D. Compost Stability and Maturity Evaluation—A Literature Review. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2010, 37, 1505–1523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Zbytniewski, R.; Buszewski, B. Characterization of Natural Organic Matter (NOM) Derived from Sewage Sludge Compost. Part 1: Chemical and Spectroscopic Properties. Bioresour. Technol. 2005, 96, 471–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Kok, D.D.; Scherer, L.; de Vries, W.; Trimbos, K.; van Bodegom, P.M. Relationships of Priming Effects with Organic Amendment Composition and Soil Microbial Properties. Geoderma 2022, 422, 115951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Detailed images of studied insect species (adults and larvae) and their associated frass.
Figure 1. Detailed images of studied insect species (adults and larvae) and their associated frass.
Insects 17 00142 g001
Figure 2. Stacked 13C CP-MAS NMR spectra of the IF samples analyzed in this study. Each spectrum has been vertically offset to facilitate visual comparison of the distribution of signals across chemical shift regions. The spectral regions are annotated according to the functional group assignments: Alkyl C (0–45 ppm), O/N-Alkyl C (45–60 ppm), O-Alkyl C (60–90 ppm), Anomeric C (90–110 ppm), Aromatic C (110–145 ppm), Phenolic C (145–165 ppm), Carboxylic C (165–190 ppm), and Carbonyl C (190–220 ppm). Vertical dashed lines indicate the boundaries between regions. The variation in peak intensity and distribution across the samples reflects differences in molecular composition and the extent to which the organic matter has been transformed.
Figure 2. Stacked 13C CP-MAS NMR spectra of the IF samples analyzed in this study. Each spectrum has been vertically offset to facilitate visual comparison of the distribution of signals across chemical shift regions. The spectral regions are annotated according to the functional group assignments: Alkyl C (0–45 ppm), O/N-Alkyl C (45–60 ppm), O-Alkyl C (60–90 ppm), Anomeric C (90–110 ppm), Aromatic C (110–145 ppm), Phenolic C (145–165 ppm), Carboxylic C (165–190 ppm), and Carbonyl C (190–220 ppm). Vertical dashed lines indicate the boundaries between regions. The variation in peak intensity and distribution across the samples reflects differences in molecular composition and the extent to which the organic matter has been transformed.
Insects 17 00142 g002
Figure 3. FTIR spectra of insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples analyzed showing characteristic absorbance bands across the mid-infrared region. These spectra reveal compositional differences between substrates, which may be due to variations in organic functional groups such as proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates.
Figure 3. FTIR spectra of insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples analyzed showing characteristic absorbance bands across the mid-infrared region. These spectra reveal compositional differences between substrates, which may be due to variations in organic functional groups such as proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates.
Insects 17 00142 g003
Figure 4. Thermogravimetric (TG) and derivative thermogravimetric (DTG) profiles for each organic matter sample. Left y-axis shows relative mass loss (%) as a function of temperature; right y-axis shows mass loss rate (%/°C). Dashed vertical lines indicate temperatures corresponding to minimum DTG signal within predefined thermal decomposition ranges of 200–400 °C and 400–550 °C. These thermal transitions reflect the sequential degradation of labile and more recalcitrant components within each sample.
Figure 4. Thermogravimetric (TG) and derivative thermogravimetric (DTG) profiles for each organic matter sample. Left y-axis shows relative mass loss (%) as a function of temperature; right y-axis shows mass loss rate (%/°C). Dashed vertical lines indicate temperatures corresponding to minimum DTG signal within predefined thermal decomposition ranges of 200–400 °C and 400–550 °C. These thermal transitions reflect the sequential degradation of labile and more recalcitrant components within each sample.
Insects 17 00142 g004
Figure 5. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) profiles of organic matter in insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples, analyzed under controlled heating conditions. Curves show thermal transitions associated with decomposition and structural transformation of organic components. Vertical dashed lines indicate temperatures at which maximum heat flow was recorded within defined temperature ranges of 200–400 °C and 400–550 °C, respectively.
Figure 5. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) profiles of organic matter in insect frass (IF) and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV) samples, analyzed under controlled heating conditions. Curves show thermal transitions associated with decomposition and structural transformation of organic components. Vertical dashed lines indicate temperatures at which maximum heat flow was recorded within defined temperature ranges of 200–400 °C and 400–550 °C, respectively.
Insects 17 00142 g005
Figure 6. Boxplot showing ecotoxicity of insect frass (IF), expressed in toxicity units (TU = 100/EC50). Data are mean values (n = 3). Toxicity ranges are based on criteria of [53]. Different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
Figure 6. Boxplot showing ecotoxicity of insect frass (IF), expressed in toxicity units (TU = 100/EC50). Data are mean values (n = 3). Toxicity ranges are based on criteria of [53]. Different letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05).
Insects 17 00142 g006
Table 1. Characterization of four insect frass samples (IF) and an insect frass average sample (IFA) compared to E. fetida vermicompost (EFV).
Table 1. Characterization of four insect frass samples (IF) and an insect frass average sample (IFA) compared to E. fetida vermicompost (EFV).
Insect Frass
ParameterT.
molitor
(n = 6)
G.
mellonella
(n = 4)
H.
illucens
(n = 8)
A.
domesticus
(n = 12)
E. fetida
(n = 10)
F-ANOVAIFA
(n = 30)
EFV
(n = 10)
F-ANOVA
C (%)39.6 d41.9 e37.2 c34.8 b25.3 a175 ***38.6 b25.3 a75 ***
N (%)3.6 bc4.0 c2.9 ab6.4 d2.4 a59 ***4.1 b2.4 a17 **
P (%)1.20 b0.77 a0.92 a1.44 c0.81 a23 ***1.10 a0.81 a0.5 ns
K (%)1.54 c0.99 a2.05 d3.02 e1.28 b38 ***1.83 a1.28 a0.7 ns
Ca (%)0.19 a0.59 b0.28 a2.21 c2.93 d1026 ***0.69 a2.93 b6.9 ***
Mg (%)0.47 c0.15 a0.27 b0.66 d0.44 c524 ***0.40 a0.44 a0.6 ns
Na (%)0.03 a0.24 c0.05 b0.60 d0.21 c20,340 ***0.19 a0.21 a2.2 ns
S (%)0.21 a0.23 b0.27 c0.53 d0.31 c1429 ***0.29 a0.21 a1.9 ns
Si (%)0.22 a1.32 b0.04 a0.04 a0.15 b54 ***0.37 b0.15 a4.1 **
B (ppm)117 c756 d14 a33 a55 b55 ***208 a55 b2.1 ns
Fe (ppm)232 b42 a437 c871 d6575 e679 ***363 a6575 b971 ***
Cu (ppm)14.8 b4.3 a17.5 c66.2 d75.1 e6232 ***23.5 a75.1 b361 ***
Mn (ppm)167 c39 a91 b473 e347 d163 ***187 a347 b96 ***
Zn (ppm)94 b57 a103 b587 d287 c1592 ***187 a287 b225 ***
Al (ppm)212 a306 ab449 b871 c390 b51 ***410 a390 a0.3 ns
Mo (ppm)1.41 b0.27 a2.17 c6.37 d2.8 c925 ***2.3 a2.8 a2.1 ns
Cd (ppm)0.12 c0.06 b0.04 a0.17 d0.40 e117 ***0.10 a0.40 b63 **
Ni (ppm)1.2 a1.8 b2.6 c9.4 d10.3 d3697 ***3.2 a10.3 b29 **
Cr (ppm)1.5 a2.4 b4.4 c11.0 d27.1 e724 ***4.2 a27.1 b230 ***
Pb (ppm)0.43 ab0.01 ab0.95 b1.03 b12.2 c45 **0.57 a12.2 b567 ***
Co (ppm)0.43 ab0.1 ab0.95 b1.03 b1.8 c14 ***0.15 a1.8 b12 **
Ti (ppm)8.5 a7.3 a12.6 a27.1 b15 a17 **13 a15 a1.3 ns
Li (ppm)0.1 a1.3 a1.5 a1.9 a3.1 b9.1 **1.2 a3.1 b6.6 *
Be (ppm)0.02 a0.16 b0.05 a0.05 a0.21 b12 **0.06 a0.21 c8.3 **
Sr (ppm)9.1 b6.0 a15.9 c36.9 d25.1 cd212 ***15.4 a25.1 b5.3 **
Rb (ppm)9.9 a11.1 a10.6 a25.4 b31 b339 ***13.4 a31 b11 **
Different letters within a row indicate statistically significant differences between insect species and EFV (left) and average for all insect species and EFV (right) for each parameter. Significance: ns = not significant, * = p < 0.01, ** p < 0.001, *** = p < 0.0001.
Table 2. Physicochemical characteristics of IF and EFV.
Table 2. Physicochemical characteristics of IF and EFV.
IFpHEC
(dS m−1)
OM (%)C/NDOC
(g kg−1)
CHA
(%)
CFA
(%)
T. molitor (n = 6)5.66 a5.32 b88.9 c11.3 bc74.1 d8.10 d9.05 d
G. mellonella (n = 4)6.74 b4.81 a82.0 b10.4 b36.1 b8.60 e9.60 e
H. illucens (n = 8)7.55 c4.74 a90.1 c12.6 c49.9 c 7.63 c8.53 c
A. domesticus (n = 12)6.49 b9.59 c86.4 b5.4 a35.3 b7.13 b7.96 b
EFV (n = 10)7.48 c5.42 b52.9 a10.2 b8.843.98 a2.93 a
F-ANOVA113 ***238 ***259 ***23 ***1097 ***2718 ***2230 ***
IF Average (n = 30)6.53 a6.0587.010.2 a50.8 b7.88 b8.81 b
EFV (n = 10)7.48 b5.4252.910.2 a8.83 a3.9 a2.93 a
F-ANOVA8.52 **0.5 ns438 ***0.2 ns34 ***287 ***399 ***
EC: electrical conductivity, OM: organic matter, C/N: carbon/nitrogen ratio, DOC: dissolved organic carbon, CFA: carbon in fulvic acids, CHA: carbon in humic acids. Different letters within a column indicate statistically significant differences between insect species and EFV (top) or between the mean IF and EFV (bottom) for each parameter. Significance: ns = not significant, ** = p < 0.001, *** = p < 0.0001.
Table 3. Estimated biomolecular composition of samples based on model by [38]. Values represent percentage of organic carbon attributed to carbohydrates, proteins, lignin, aliphatic compounds, and carbonyl structures. These estimations are derived from mathematical fitting of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectral distributions to spectra of model components.
Table 3. Estimated biomolecular composition of samples based on model by [38]. Values represent percentage of organic carbon attributed to carbohydrates, proteins, lignin, aliphatic compounds, and carbonyl structures. These estimations are derived from mathematical fitting of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectral distributions to spectra of model components.
IFCarbohydratesProteinLigninAliphaticCarbonyl
T. molitor64.2321.7312.982.270.00
G. mellonella58.9226.408.930.005.06
H. illucens66.0124.874.753.240.51
A. domesticus62.3829.297.070.111.48
EFV29.7127.8326.4313.025.58
Table 4. Phytotoxicity indexes: percentage of germination (%G), percentage of radicular length (%L), and germination index (%GI) of insect frass and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV).
Table 4. Phytotoxicity indexes: percentage of germination (%G), percentage of radicular length (%L), and germination index (%GI) of insect frass and E. fetida vermicompost (EFV).
IF%G%L%GI
T. molitor13.8 a8.8 a1.3 a
G. mellonella99.1 c73.9 c72.6 c
H. illucens85.4 bc81.2 c69.7 c
A. domesticus70.3 b 40.7 b28.6 b
EFV100 c128 d129 d
F-ANOVA63 ***229 ***140 ***
Different letters within a column indicate statistically significant differences between insect species and EFV for each parameter. Significance: *** = p < 0.0001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Castillo, P.; Sáez-Tovar, J.A.; Andreu-Rodríguez, F.J.; Estrada-Medina, H.; Marhuenda-Egea, F.C.; Bustamante, M.Á.; Martínez-Sánchez, A.; Martínez-Sabater, E.; Orden, L.; Barranco, P.; et al. Could Insect Frass Be Used as a New Organic Fertilizer in Agriculture? Nutritional Composition, Nature of Organic Matter, Ecotoxicity, and Phytotoxicity of Insect Excrement Compared to Eisenia fetida Vermicompost. Insects 2026, 17, 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17020142

AMA Style

Castillo P, Sáez-Tovar JA, Andreu-Rodríguez FJ, Estrada-Medina H, Marhuenda-Egea FC, Bustamante MÁ, Martínez-Sánchez A, Martínez-Sabater E, Orden L, Barranco P, et al. Could Insect Frass Be Used as a New Organic Fertilizer in Agriculture? Nutritional Composition, Nature of Organic Matter, Ecotoxicity, and Phytotoxicity of Insect Excrement Compared to Eisenia fetida Vermicompost. Insects. 2026; 17(2):142. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17020142

Chicago/Turabian Style

Castillo, Patricia, José Antonio Sáez-Tovar, Francisco Javier Andreu-Rodríguez, Héctor Estrada-Medina, Frutos Carlos Marhuenda-Egea, María Ángeles Bustamante, Anabel Martínez-Sánchez, Encarnación Martínez-Sabater, Luciano Orden, Pablo Barranco, and et al. 2026. "Could Insect Frass Be Used as a New Organic Fertilizer in Agriculture? Nutritional Composition, Nature of Organic Matter, Ecotoxicity, and Phytotoxicity of Insect Excrement Compared to Eisenia fetida Vermicompost" Insects 17, no. 2: 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17020142

APA Style

Castillo, P., Sáez-Tovar, J. A., Andreu-Rodríguez, F. J., Estrada-Medina, H., Marhuenda-Egea, F. C., Bustamante, M. Á., Martínez-Sánchez, A., Martínez-Sabater, E., Orden, L., Barranco, P., López, M. J., & Moral, R. (2026). Could Insect Frass Be Used as a New Organic Fertilizer in Agriculture? Nutritional Composition, Nature of Organic Matter, Ecotoxicity, and Phytotoxicity of Insect Excrement Compared to Eisenia fetida Vermicompost. Insects, 17(2), 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17020142

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Back to TopTop