Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ifset

Bread enriched with flour from cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea) MARK
⁎
Lauren Menegon de Oliveira , Andressa Jantzen da Silva Lucas, Carolina Lopes Cadaval,
Myrian Sallas Mellado
School of Chemistry and Food, Federal University of Rio Grande, Rio Grande, RS, Brazil

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Animals and insects are the main sources of protein. The objective of the present study was to produce a flour
Entomophagy from cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea) for protein enrichment of wheat bread. To prepare the flour, the
Resource availability dehydrated insects were crushed and sieved to reduce the granulometry to a particle size of 1.18 mm. The flour
Bakery was analyzed microbiologically and then added in amounts of 5, 10, and 15% (based on wheat flour) in a bread
Proteins
formulation that was analyzed for chemical composition and color, firmness, and specific volume and compared
Food
to white wheat bread and whole wheat bread. Sensorial evaluation was carried out on bread enriched with 10%
roasted flour as the one that presented the best nutritional characteristics, differing little from the white and
whole wheat bread. It is concluded that the use of cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea) flour is an efficient
way to enrich wheat bread without alterations in sensorial quality.

1. Introduction
A report released by the United Nations (UN) discloses that the
world population is expected to reach > 9.2 billion by 2050. This re-
presents a great challenge to the availability of resources to meet the
needs of this enormous population. Increased productivity, new and
more efficient and sustainable technical proposals to combat crop pests,
and more appropriate product handling to minimize losses to mar-
keting, among other factors, will be needed so that the world food
production meets the growing demand for decades to come (Zuben,
2012).
Wild animals and insects are often the main sources of protein in
forest areas, while leaves, seeds, mushrooms, honey, and fruits provide
minerals and vitamins that ensure a nutritious diet. The forecast of the
UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) says that the land area
intended for breeding will have to grow by 70% to feed the planet's
population by 2050, which is expected to reach 9 billion people, and
even with the small amount of insects that can be consumed by humans
(only 1600 edible types in 1.5 million species cataloged), the frenetic
pace at which insects reproduce makes their “meat” an abundant source
of food. They are rich in protein, vitamins (especially vitamin B), and
minerals, such as iron and calcium. In addition, they are rich in lipids
and essential fatty acids (Dicke, 2012; Heymans & Evrard, 1970;
Landry, De Foliart, & Sundae, 1986; MacEvilly, 2000; Phelps,
Struters, & Moyo, 1975).
According to Lynn Kimsey (2014), entomology professor at the
University of California in the United States, besides being more nu-
tritious than other types of meat, it is cheaper to raise insects than
cattle. Since insects are cold-blooded, have more complex metabolisms
than warm-blooded animals, and can adapt to different temperature
levels, they need less food and a simpler and cheaper feed. In addition,
insects take up less space and reproduce faster than other animals
commonly seen in pastures. And at the end of the process, they are
better leveraged by the fact that many parts of cattle, for example, are
not used for human consumption, such as the hooves, teeth, bones, and
skin, which are commonly used in the manufacture of animal feed.
The FAO lists the benefits of large-scale insect production: 2 kg of
feed is required to produce 1 kg of insects, whereas cattle require 8 kg
of feed to produce 1 kg of meat. The insect feed is simple because it can
be made from agricultural residues. Insects are extremely ecological;
they use much less water and produce less greenhouse gases than cattle
(Durst, Johnson, Leslie, & Shono, 2006).
Several groups of insects can be found in abundance in different
environments; one can therefore infer that a large amount of biomass is
not utilized as a food source for humans. And since in the future the
greatest challenge for humanity will be growing food in increasingly
greater quantity, insects are likely to be an important food source
(MacEvilly, 2000; Zuben, 2012).
Worldwide, the base of the food pyramid is made up of carbohy-
drates. Because of this, bread has high consumption because it is high in
this energy source, and it is not an expensive food. It can be consumed
by all social classes, from a food supplement, as seen in families with

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: laurenmenegon@hotmail.com (L.M. de Oliveira).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2017.08.015
Received 21 December 2016; Received in revised form 10 May 2017; Accepted 29 August 2017
Available online 06 September 2017
1466-8564/ <outputStr5>
L.M. de Oliveira et al. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

greater purchasing power, or even as one of the few sources of food, as Table 1
seen in low-income families. Bread can be purchased in high-end es- Formulations of the bread used in the study.
tablishments or produced at home in a more artisanal way. Therefore,
Ingredients Standard Bread enriched with cockroach flour
aiming at the protein enrichment of bread, this study set out to modify a bread
product very popular in Brazil using a type of insect, the cinereous 5% 10% 15%
cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea).
Wheat flour (g) 300 285 270 255
Insects flour (g) – 15 30 45
2. Materials and methods Sodium chloride (g) 6 6 6 6
Sucrose (g) 15 15 15 15
2.1. Raw materials Fresh yeast (g) 9 9 9 9
Ascorbic acid (g) 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027
Hydrogenated vegetable 6 5.47a 1.94a 0a
Wheat flour was purchased in the local market of Rio Grande, RS, fat (g)
and flour based on the cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea) was Water (mL) 180 160 160 158
provided by Nutrinsecta, a company that develops ingredients for an-
imal feed that is certified by the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and
a
Fat content present in the insect flour was deducted from the formulation.

Supply. Insects were reared obeying strict environmental and health

standards. They were fed with fruit and vegetable remains, slaughtered
in boiling water, and dried in an oven and packaged. The ingredients
used for the production of bread, such as hydrogenated vegetable oil
(Primor), sodium chloride (Synth), and sucrose (União), were pur-
chased from the local shops. Additives such as ascorbic acid PA (Synth),
manufacturing aids, and fresh yeast (Fleischmann) were also used.
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Obtaining the insect flour
To obtain the flour, cinereous cockroaches, received dehydrated,
were ground in a ball mill for 3 h. Subsequently, the flour obtained was
sieved through a 14 mesh and then packaged in glass jars and kept
refrigerated at 4 °C until testing.
2.2.2. Assessment of cinereous cockroach flour
2.2.2.1. Chemical composition of the insect flour. The following chemical
analysis was conducted on the cockroach flour:
a) Humidity: determined according to AACC (2000), Method No. 44-
15ª;
b) Ash: determined according to AACC (2000), Method No. 08-01;
c) Protein: determined according to the Kjeldahl method, AACC
(2000), Method No. 46-13;
d) Total lipids: the fat content was determined by the Soxhlet method,
AACC (2000), Method No. 30-20;
e) Fibers: determined by the Adolfo Lutz Institute (Zenebon & Pascuet,
2008);
f) Amino acid profile: determined by high-performance liquid chro-
matography (HPLC) in CBO laboratory, Campinas São Paulo/Brazil;
g) Fatty acids: determined by gas chromatography in CBO laboratory,
Campinas São Paulo/Brazil.
2.2.2.2. Microbiological evaluation of cockroach flour. In the
microbiological evaluation, analyses were carried out to determine
thermo-tolerant coliforms at 45 °C and mold and yeast counts. These
analyses were performed following the procedures described by the
American Public Health Association (APHA, 2001). To verify the
sanitary conditions, the sample was subjected to Salmonella analysis
according to NBR 12124 - MB 3465/1991 (Salmonella - Determination
in Food) and positive Staphylococcus coagulase following the
procedures described by the APHA (2001).
2.2.3. Formulation of standard and insect flour-added breads
The straight dough method was used for the preparation of the
bread. Three formulations (Table 1) with different quantities (5%, 10%,
and 15% of cockroach flour in wheat flour basis) were evaluated and
compared to the standard bread to verify the influence on the specific
volume (SV), hardness, color, protein content, and sensory quality.
2.2.3.1. Elaboration of standard and cockroach flour-enriched
bread. First, the dry ingredients were blended into a planetary mixer
(Kitchen-Aid) followed by the addition of vegetable fat, water, and
dissolved yeast. The mixture was done at full speed for 10 min until the
gluten was developed. The dough was weighed, divided into 80-g
pieces, rounded in a spherical shape by hand, modeled with a roll of
pasta and placed with roll and put into greased individual metal pans
(3 × 5 × 11.5 cm). The fermentation step was carried out in an oven
(Q317M-Quimis) at 30 °C for 95 min, with controlled temperature and
relative humidity. Baking occurred at 200 °C for 20 min in an electric
oven (Diplomata-Fischer). The resulting breads were cooled to ambient
temperature and examined after 1 h of rest.
2.2.4. Evaluation of bread quality
The evaluation of bread quality was performed by determining the
external and internal characteristics, aroma, and taste according to El
Dash, Diaz, and Camargo (1982) spreadsheet. The parameters analyzed
as external characteristics were crust color, breaking, symmetry, and SV
(mL/g), which was obtained by the ratio between the apparent volume
(mL) carried by millet seed displacement according to Pizzinatto,
Magno, Campagnollli, Vitti, and Leitao (1993) and the mass (g). Crust
characteristics, crumb color, crumb cell structure, and crumb texture
were analyzed as internal characteristics. Subsequently, the aroma and
taste were analyzed.
2.2.4.1. Crumb hardness. The hardness of the bread crumb was
measured on fresh bread after 1 h of baking and held in a
texturometer TA-XT2 (Stable Micro Systems, UK). The test was
performed according to AACC method 2000 (74-09.01), which
consists of compressing two slices of 25 mm thickness in the
texturometer platform center with a cylindrical probe of 36 mm
diameter under the following working conditions: pre-test speed of
1.0 mm/s, test speed of 1.7 mm/s, post-test speed of 10.0 mm/s, 40%
compression, and trigger force of 5 g.
2.2.4.2. Crumb color. The analysis of the bread crumb and crust was
done in a Minolta® CR400 colorimeter (Minolta, 1993). The experiment
followed the color system in the L* a* b* (or CIE L*a*b*) space defined
by the CIE (International Commission on Illumination) in 1976,
evaluating the L* values (brightness) and a* and b * (chromaticity
coordinates). The value of chroma or C* and hue angle or hab was also
calculated, referred to as the CIELCh color system according to Minolta
(1993) (Eqs. (1) and (2)).
1
C∗ = (a∗2 + b∗2 ) 2 (1)
b∗
hab = tan−1 ⋅
a∗ (2)

31
L.M. de Oliveira et al. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

2.2.5. Sensory evaluation Table 3

Sensory analysis was performed with 51 untrained judges chosen Microbiological evaluation of flour prepared using cinereous cockroach.
randomly among students and teachers of the institution, where the
Microorganism Count
acceptability and purchase intention tests were applied for the samples
of bread enriched with cinereous cockroach flour at the concentration Yeast and molds 160 CFU/ga
of 10%. The bread enriched with 10% flour was chosen as the one that Thermo-tolerant coliforms 45 °C Absence
Salmonella Absence em 25 g
presented the best nutritional characteristics, differing little from the
Coagulase-positive Staphylococcus Absence
white and whole wheat bread.
A nine-point hedonic scale was used in the acceptance test, having a
Estimated value. CFU: colony-formed units.
at one extreme the qualification “disliked very much,” in the center
“indifferent,” and at the other extreme “liked very much,” according to Table 4
NBR 12994 (ABNT, 1993). The evaluated attributes were overall im- Technical characteristics of standard bread and bread enriched with cockroach flour.
pression, aroma, flavor, color, and texture. The acceptability index (AI)
Assays SV⁎ (cm3·g− 1) Hardness (g)
was calculated according to Eq. (3).
a
Nota. 100 Standard bread 3.57 ± 0.001 240.11 ± 3.15a
AI (%) = Enriched bread 5% 3.06 ± 0.192b 291.97 ± 7.56ab
9 (3)
Enriched bread 10% 2.86 ± 0.192c 377.64 ± 5.87c
The purchase intent tests were performed on a five-point scale, with Enriched bread 15% 2.45 ± 0.192d 574.19 ± 7.37d
1 meaning certainly would buy and 5 certainly would not buy.
5%, 10%, and 15% are the substitutions of cockroach flour in the formulations.
⁎
The same letters in the columns do not differ statistically (p < 0.05).
2.2.6. Data processing
Data were compared using analysis of variance (ANOVA), and the 3.3. Evaluation of standard bread and flour-enriched breads with cinereous
means were compared by the Tukey test, with 95% statistical sig- cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea)
nificance (α) and p < 0.05, using Statistica 5.0 software. All analyses
were performed in triplicate, except for the amino acid profile and fatty Table 4 shows the results of the SV and hardness an hour after re-
acids. moval from the oven.
It is possible to observe from the data that there were significant
3. Results and discussion differences in the volumes of all the trials, and with the increase of the
insect flour concentration, the SV reduced. Additionally, the values of
3.1. Chemical composition of cockroach flour hardness found for standard bread and for 5% enriched bread did not
present a significant difference, nor did the 10% bread differ sig-
The results of the analysis of the proximal composition of cockroach nificantly from the whole wheat bread. The higher the concentration of
flour are shown in Table 2. insect meal added, the greater the change in the formation of the gluten
One can observe a slight variation in the proximal composition network, due to the type and nature of the proteins present. This made
values performed in the laboratory when compared to the figures the mass less viscoelastic, making it difficult to expand the gas cells, or
provided for Nutrinsecta. This variation may be due to the fact that the SV whole wheat flour has a higher amount of fiber than wheat flour,
dehydrated insects were ground and sieved to obtain the flour that was and this also prevents the formation of gluten, a reason that justifies the
used in the enrichment of breads. We can highlight a reduction of fibers similarity statistic with bread enriched with 10% of the flour of cinerea
and an increase in the concentration of protein, demonstrating that the cheap.
insect exoskeleton, which has a considerable amount of fibers and mi- As reported by Moore, Heinbockel, Dockery, Ulmer, and Arendt
nerals, was retained in the fraction that was discharged. The protein (2006) and Mezaize, Chevallier, Le Bail, and De Lamballerie (2009),
content of the cockroach flour (63.22) was similar to that presented by there is a strong negative correlation between SV and the hardness of
Ramos-Elorduy (1998) for Periplaneta americana L (65.60) and Peripla- the breads justified by the greater compression of the gas cells in the
neta australasiae (62.40), showing a high content of the component that breads of lower volume, resulting in increased crumb hardness by in-
is desired to elevate in tested breads. creasing the resistance to deformation of the product in the mouth.
Figueira, Crizel, Silva, and Salas-Mellado (2011) added concentrations
3.2. Microbiological evaluation of cockroach flour (Nauphoeta cinerea) of 2, 3, 4, and 5% of Spirulina platensis in breads prepared with rice flour
and found that up to a concentration of 4%, there were no significant
The results obtained in the microbiological analyses of cockroach differences in the SV and hardness of the breads; however, from this
flour are shown in Table 3. concentration, the bread started to show significant differences. The
The insect flour presented satisfactory sanitary conditions, since the insect flour used for enrichment at a concentration of 5% showed no
analytical results are within the range of established values as specified significant difference in hardness compared to standard wheat bread,
in the regulation, thus enabling the follow-up study. but the crumb hardness increased for additions beyond this con-
centration.
Table 2 Fig. 1 shows the breads made with cockroach flour at different
Chemical proximal composition of cockroach flour and dehydrated cinereous cockroach. concentrations.
Components (%) Insect floura Cinereous cockroachb

Humidity 4.64 ± 0.035 6.00 3.4. Color of the crumb and crust of standard and insect-added flour breads
Ashes 4.63 ± 0.063 5.11
Protein 63.59 ± 0.468 59.79 Table 5 shows the color parameters evaluated in the crumb and
Lipids 23.29 ± 1.350 21.27 crust of standard bread and breads from insect-added flour. We ob-
Fibers 4.67 ± 0.028 6.85
served that the resulting breads presented crust and crumb color
a
Dry basis. parameters similar to whole wheat bread.
b
Proximal composition values of the dehydrated cinereous cockroach presented by Fig. 1 presents the color parameters of the crumb and crust of the
Nutrinsecta. standard bread and breads from cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea)

32
L.M. de Oliveira et al. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

Fig. 1. Breads (duplicate) prepared with insect

flour in order of increasing concentration of
cockroach flour related to total wheat flour.
5%: Breads with 5% substitution of cockroach
flour in the formulation.
10%: Breads with 10% substitution of cockroach
flour in the formulation.
15%: Breads with 15% substitution of cockroach
flour in the formulation.

Table 5
Color parameters of the crumb and crust of standard bread and bread made with cockroach flour.

Assays Hab crumb L* crumb C* crumb L* crust Hab crust C* crust

a a a a a
Standard bread 88.98 ± 1.033 69.40 ± 1.705 11.19 ± 0.736 55.65 ± 4.523 61.25 ± 5.007 35.49 ± 3.668a
Enriched bread 5% 84.67 ± 0.734b 64.62 ± 1.672b 13.47 ± 0.819a 49.16 ± 4.060bc 60.85 ± 2.79ab 33.29 ± 1.449bc
Enriched bread 10% 79.55 ± 0.718c 62.07 ± 1.087cd 12.85 ± 0.445a 42.42 ± 2.030cd 54.87 ± 1.630cd 30.78 ± 1.736c
Enriched bread 15% 76.81 ± 0.857d 59.40 ± 1.766d 13.39 ± 0.256a 40.10 ± 3.187cd 54.04 ± 3.353d 27.42 ± 3.088d

The same letters in the columns do not differ statistically (p < 0.05). 5%, 10%, and 15% are the substitutions of cockroach flour in the formulations.

flour. The lightness in the crust ranged from 64.62 to 59.40, showing
that the samples of 10 and 15% had no significant difference between
them. Regarding the crust, the samples of 5, 10, and 15% did not have
significant differences among them, and the whole wheat bread did not
present a significant difference from the bread crust with 5 and 10%
enriched bread. The addition of cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta cinerea)
flour meal at all concentrations showed that the higher the concentra-
tion, the lower the hue (hab) angle in the crumb and crust, resulting in a
distancing of the desired value (close to 90°), which should tend to
yellow to obtain a product similar to wheat bread.
3.5. Bread quality evaluation by spreadsheet (El Dash et al., 1982)
change could be observed with an increasing concentration of cock-
roach flour compared to wheat flour.
3.6. Physicochemical analysis of the breads
3.6.1. Protein content in bread with cockroach flour
With respect to the percentage of proteins, bread with 5% cinereous
cockroach flour obtained 7.88% protein, 10% obtained 12.53% protein,
and 15% obtained 14.67% protein. Bread with 10% cinereous cock-
roach flour obtained an increase of 49.16% of protein compared to
standard bread. Besides high protein, the 10% enriched bread showed a
good total quality score and low crumb hardness values.

The total scores obtained for standard bread and breads made from
cockroach flour are presented in Table 6.
According to Dutcosky (1996), bread with a score of 81–100 points
can be classified as a good-quality bread, 61–80 as regular bread, and
31–60 as a bad-quality bread. The values of the total score of the bread
varied from 72.4 to 85.17. According to this classification, both stan-
dard bread and the 5% modified bread showed good quality, and breads
enriched with 10% and 15% cockroach flour showed regular quality,
but 10% enriched bread reached a value of 81, becoming a better
classification than 15% enriched bread.
The following characteristics evaluated in the worksheet decreased
in value with the increase in insect flour addition: crumb color, due to
the fact that the bread gets darker, similarly to the whole grain; crumb
texture, where increased cockroach flour presented higher crumb
compression values resulting from the alteration of the protein network
in the formation of gluten, which was also observed in bread made with
whole wheat flour; and aroma and taste, as a slight odor and taste
3.6.2. Chemical composition of the standard bread and bread with 10%
cockroach flour
Table 7 presents the results of chemical analyses performed in
standard breads and breads enriched with 10% cockroach flour.
According to Table 7, the bread enriched with cockroach flour ob-
tained a much higher protein content than standard bread and also
presented a lower percentage of carbohydrates. Regarding the percen-
tage of lipids, there were no significant differences in all samples; the
bread enriched with cockroach flour presents an advantage in the type
of fat present, with a large percentage being unsaturated fatty acids rich
in ω6 and ω9.
3.7. Amino acid profile of cockroach flour
Fig. 2 shows the data obtained in amino acid profile analysis of
cockroach flour.
According to Blanco and Bressani (1991), the protein quality refers

Table 6 Table 7
Total quality score of standard bread and breads from insect-added Chemical composition of standard and enriched breads with 10% cinereous cockroach
flour. flour.

Assay Total points⁎ Components % Standard bread⁎⁎ Bread 10%

Standard bread 85.17 ± 0.019a Ashes⁎ 4.197 ± 0.107a 4.717 ± 0.163a

Enriched bread 5% 82.15 ± 0.033b Protein⁎ 9.688 ± 0.473a 22.652 ± 0.982b
Enriched bread 10% 79.62 ± 0.576bc Lipids⁎ 5.531 ± 0.387a 5.582 ± 0.076a
Enriched bread 15% 72.62 ± 0.576d Fibers⁎ 2.038 ± 0.021a 2.293 ± 0.320b
Carbohydrates⁎ 78.539 ± 0.473a 64.762 ± 0.633b
5%, 10%, and 15% are the substitutions of cockroach flour in the for-
mulations. Bread 10% that with a substitution of 10% of cockroach flour in the formulation.
⁎ ⁎
The same letters in the columns do not differ statistically Data on dry basis.
⁎⁎
(p < 0.05). The same letters on the rows do not differ statistically.

33
L.M. de Oliveira et al. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

Fig. 2. Amino acid profile of cinereous cockroach (Nauphoeta

68.50%
cinerea) flour.
Source: CBO laboratory analyses, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil.

50.53%
6.12%
5.08%
4.58%

4.42%
3.56%

3.51%

3.37%

3.17%
3.13%

2.61%

2.36%
1.92%
1.89%
1.76%

1.59%
0.85%
0.56%

0.25%

0.05%
to its ability to meet the nutritional requirements of humans for es- 3.8. Fatty acid profile of cockroach (Nauphoeta cinéria) flour
sential amino acids and non-essential nitrogen for protein synthesis
purposes. Considering the average contents of the different orders of Fig. 3 shows the fatty acid profile of cinereous cockroach flour.
insect, the main components of insects are protein and fat, followed by Regarding the composition of unsaturated fatty acids of the cock-
fiber, nitrogen-free extract, and ash. roach flour, of the 18.45% total fat present in flour, 10.94% is un-
Based on the amino acid composition in the cockroach flour, it can saturated fat. Oleic acid (ω9) with 9.52% and the essential fatty acid
be seen that those classified as essentials are present in large quantities, linoleic acid (ω6) with 1.42% are included in this percentage. The
and among them, leucine with 3.51%, lysine with 3.37%, and valine omega-9 (ω9) fatty acid showed a good concentration in cockroach
with 2.61% are worth mentioning, since these are of great importance flour of approximately 49.7% total fatty acids compared with beef,
due to their daily intake necessity for humans. Comparing the amino which, according to Domene (2002), has about 40% total fatty acids.
acid requirements for adults published by the World Health This high concentration is a positive factor, since the ω9 has a hy-
Organization (WHO, 2007) with the amino acid profile of the cockroach pocholesterolemic effect. These results are similar to those presented by
flour produced in this study, it can be observed that the flour meets the Thompson (1973), showing that the principal fatty acids of the cock-
amino acid requirements of adults, showing that bread enriched with roaches are oleic acid and monounsaturated fatty acids, groups that
the insect flour would have improved nutritive value compared to present a healthy performance in humans.
standard bread. According to Hautrive, Marques, and Kubota (2012), the saturated
When comparing these values to those of meat and pig bone flours fatty acid content present in ostrich meat is 27.34%, similar to that of
(Pozza et al., 2004), values for the same amino acids (leucine, valine, pork (ham), which is 28.02%, beef (rump) percentage of and chicken
and lysine) are in higher quantity in cockroach flour. Meat flour pre- (thigh and drumstick) is the one with the least percentage at
sented 1.48% for leucine, 1.10% for valine, and 1.41% for lysine, 19.73%.When comparing these data with those found in cockroach
whereas bone flour presented values of 2.00% for leucine, 1.44% for flour, we can see the low percentage of saturated fat, which reaches less
valine, and 1.99% for lysine. Compared to shrimp head silage flour than half the value obtained for the chicken, and thus the insect flour
(Guilherme, Cavalheiro, & Souza, 2007), insect flour obtained a higher showed the lowest percentage compared to other meats.
value only for leucine, whereas the study indicates a lysine value of Saturated fat can contribute in the medium and long term to the
3.67%, a valine value of 3.41%, and a leucine value of 2.73%. onset of obesity and cardiovascular disease, which therefore makes the

Fig. 3. Fatty acid profile of cinereous cockroach flour.

18.45%

Source: CBO laboratory analyses.

10.94%
9.52%
9.17%

7.51%
5.69%

1.60%

1.42%

1.42%

0.80%
0.35%
0.14%

0%

34
L.M. de Oliveira et al. Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 44 (2017) 30–35

Table 8
Acceptance index obtained in the sensorial analysis of the
loaves with 10% cinereous cockroach flour.
Parameters AI* (%)
Overall impression 84.77
Aroma 78.00
Flavor 76.00
Color 85.00
Texture 85.88
AI* acceptance index.
4%
22%
33%
41%
Certainly buy Possibly buy Maybe buy / may not buy
Possibly not buy Certainly would not buy
Fig. 4. Results for purchase intention of loaves developed with 10% cinereous cockroach
flour.
low percentage in the cockroach flour a positive point. According to
Grundy and Denke (1990), saturated fatty acids are considered hyper-
cholesterolemic, and more worrying in this regard are myristic (C14:0),
lauric (C12:00), and palmitic (C16:0) acids. Stearic acid (C18: 0) has a
neutral function, because the body immediately turns it into oleic acid
(C18:1). The saturated fatty acids increase the level of cholesterol in the
blood by reducing LDL-cholesterol receptor activity and the clearance
of LDL in the bloodstream.
3.9. Sensory evaluation of bread with cockroach flour
Table 8 shows the results obtained in the sensorial analysis of breads
made from cockroach flour.
Regarding the acceptance index (AI), a value > 75% was obtained
in all parameters analyzed. According to Spehar and Santos (2002), for
a product to be considered as accepted in terms of its sensory proper-
ties, it is necessary to obtain an AI of at least 70%.
The flavor parameter was the lowest. It is believed this occurred
because the judges knew about the addition of the cockroach flour in
the bread, and the evaluation may have been influenced because en-
tomophagy is not a local custom, in addition to the disgust of some
people for insects. On the other hand, the taste of the product obtained
a 76% acceptance rate, showing good sensory acceptance.
Fig. 4 shows the results for purchase intention of the loaves devel-
oped with cinereous cockroach flour.
Regarding the purchase intention (Fig. 4), the sample of bread with
cinereous cockroach flour added received a positive attitude of pur-
chase, with 22% of the judges stating that they would certainly buy and
41% possibly buy, totaling a 63% positive response. Since bread en-
riched with cockroach flour is an unknown product by consumers,
being new with respect to the culture of the judges, an acceptance of
possible purchase of 63% is considered a good result.
4. Conclusion
Through this study, the feasibility of producing an insect-based flour
for bread enrichment was verified. The flour produced presented sa-
tisfactory sanitary conditions and can therefore be used in human food
with a proper chemical composition, showing a good nutritional profile
due to the amino acid and fatty acid contents. The addition of cock-
roach flour to bread formulations did not alter the technical char-
acteristics in a negative way, and the choice of the bread enriched at
10% was due to the increase of 49.16% in protein compared to standard
bread. In the sensorial analysis, the judges moderately liked the 10%
enriched bread. Regarding the acceptance index, a value > 75% was
obtained in all parameters analyzed, and for the purchase intent, the
bread with cinereous cockroach flour added obtained a positive attitude
of purchase, with 22% of the judges stating that they would certainly
buy and 41% stating that they would possibly buy.
References
American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC) (2000). Approved methods of the AACC (10th
edition). St. Paul, MN: American Association of Cereal Chemists.
American Public Health Association (APHA) (2001). Compendium of methods for the micro-
biological examination of foods (4th ed.). Washington, DC: APHA.
Associação Brasileira De Normas Técnicas (ABNT) (1993). Métodos de Análise Sensorial dos
alimentos e bebidas - NBR 12994. São Paulo: ABNT.
Blanco, A., & Bressani, R. (1991). Biodisponibilidad de aminoácidos en el frijol (Phaseolus
vulgaris). Archivos Latinoamericanos de Nutrición, 41(3), 38–51.
Dicke, M. (2012). Biologia, Insetos os seres mais antigos. http://megaarquivo.com/tag/
biologia/page/5/, Accessed date: 23 April 2014.
Domene, S. M. A. (2002). A contribuição da carne bovina para uma alimentação saudável. V
Congresso Brasileiro das raças zebuínas. Uberabahttp://www.lume.ufrgs.br/handle/10183/
22933/, Accessed date: 1 November 2014.
Durst, P. B., Johnson, D. V., Leslie, R. N., & Shono, K. (2006). Forest insects as food: Humans bite
back. Edible forest insects. Chiang Mai, Thailand: Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations.
Dutcosky, S. D. (1996). Analise Sensorial de Alimentos. Curitiba: Editora Universitária
Champagnat.
El Dash, A., Diaz, N. A. M., & Camargo, C. R. (1982). Os Fundamentos da tecnologia de pani-
ficação. Secretaria da Industria e Comercio, Ciência e Tecnologia (349p).
Figueira, F. S., Crizel, T. M., Silva, C. R., & Salas-Mellado, M. (2011). Pão sem glúten en-
riquecido com Spirulina platensis. Brazilian Journal of Food Technology, 14(4), 308–316.
Grundy, S. M., & Denke, M. A. (1990). Dietary influences on serum lipids and lipoproteins.
Journal of Lipid Research, 31, 1149–1172.
Guilherme, R. F., Cavalheiro, J. M. O., & Souza, P. A. S. (2007). Caracterização química e perfil
aminoácidico da farinha de Silagem de cabeça de camarão. Ciênc. Agrotec. 31(3), 793–797
Lavras.
Hautrive, T. P., Marques, A. C., & Kubota, E. H. (2012). Avaliação da composição centesimal,
colesterol e perfil de ácidos graxos de cortes cárneos comerciais de avestruz, suíno, bovino
e frango. Alim. Nutr., Araraguara, 23(2), 327–334.
Heymans, J. C., & Evrard, A. (1970). Contribution a L'etude de la Composition Alimentaire des
Insects Comestibles de la Province du Katanga (R.D.C.). Problemes Sociaux du Congo. 90–91.
Problemes Sociaux du Congo (pp. 333–340).
Kimsey, L. (2014). Por que você deve começar a comer insetos? Revista Super Interessante on-
linehttp://super.abril.com.br/alimentacao/voce-deve-comecar-comer-insetos-730304.
shtml/, Accessed date: 25 April 2014.
Landry, S. V., De Foliart, G. R., & Sundae, M. L. (1986). Larval protein quality of six species of
Lepidoptera (Saturniidae, Sphingidae, Noctuidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 79(3),
600–604.
MacEvilly (2000). Bugs in the system. Nutrition Bulletin, 25, 267–268.
Mezaize, S., Chevallier, S., Le Bail, A., & De Lamballerie, M. S. (2009). Optimization of gluten-
free formulations for French-style breads. Journal of Food Science, 74(10), 1111.
Minolta (1993). Precise color communication – Color control, from feeling to instrumentation.
Osaka-Japan: Minolta Camera Co. Ltd.
Moore, S., Heinbockel, M., Dockery, P., Ulmer, H. M., & Arendt, E. K. (2006). Network for-
mation in gluten-free bread with application of transglutaminase. Cereal Chemistry, 83(1),
28–36.
Phelps, R. J., Struters, J. K., & Moyo, J. L. (1975). Investigation into the nutritive value of
Macrotermes falciger (Isoptera –Temitidae). Zoologica Africana, 10(2), 123–132.
Pizzinatto, A., Magno, C. P. R. S., Campagnollli, D. M. F., Vitti, P., & Leitao, R. F. F. (1993).
Avaliação tecnológica de produtos derivados de farinha de trigo (pão, macarrão, biscoito) (3rd
ed.). (Campinas).
Pozza, P. C., Gomes, P. C., Donzele, J. L., Rostagno, H. S., Pozza, M. S. S., & Nogueira, E. T.
(2004). Digestibilidade Ileal Aparente e Verdadeira de Aminoácidos de Farinhas de Carne e
Ossos para Suínos. Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia, 33(5), 1181–1191.
Ramos-Elorduy, J. (1998). Creepy crawly cuisine: The gourmet guide to edible insects. Park Street.
Rochester. Vermont150.
Spehar, C. R., & Santos, R. L. B. (2002). Quinoa BRS Piabiru: alternativa para diversificar os
sistemas de produção de grãos. Pesquisa Agropecuária Brasileira, 37(6), 889–893 Brasília.
Thompson, S. N. (1973). Review and comparative characterization of fatty acids composition of
7 insects orders. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 45, 467–482.
World Health Organization (WHO) (2007). Protein and amino acid requirements in human nu-
trition: Report of a joint FAO/WHO/UNU expert consultation. WHO Technical Report Series.
Zenebon, O., & Pascuet, N. S. (2008). Métodos físico-químicos para análise de alimentos (4th ed.).
São Paulo: Instituto Adolfo Lutz.
Zuben, C. J. V. (2012). Depto de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências - Unesp Rio Claro. http://
www.rc.unesp.br/biosferas/0037.php./, Accessed date: 2 April 2014.

35