Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Although this question should have been popular I think I never saw it anywhere so I'll go ahead and ask...
Is there a significant difference in nutricional value between cricket species?There are definately some pros and cons when using certain species,like for example black/field crickets are very easy to handle and bowl feed but I was told that they have too much chitin,is this true by the way?On the other hand Acheta domestica is suggested by many but they are very dificult to handle and almost impossible to bowl feed.Personally I found gryllus assymilis very hardy but again I cannot find them easily on the shops.Also I know there some other species available,the question is should I bother using a variety or is this not important enough?I think you got my point,I hope to have some comments on this,
thanks a lot

Hey gyes come on,it's a decent question.......

You asked..."Is there a significant difference in nutricional value between cricket species?"...here's the information I have found...please be aware of the sources. They are not all from scientific/researched sites...
http://www.livefoodshop.co.uk/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t26285.html
"Brown House / Grey Cricket (Acheta domestica) are native to the UK these are the most commonly used live food, They can withstand a great range of temperature, and are non-aggressive to the animals they are being fed too. Rich in protein and have a good shelf life. These crickets also travel relatively well in cold weather.
Black Field Cricket (Gryllus bimaculatus) are a Southern European species virtually identical to the Brown House Cricket in nutritional terms. These large crickets can withstand the higher humidity required by some species. These crickets travel quite well in cold conditions.
Silent Field Crickets (Gryllus assimilis) are virtually identical to the Black Field Cricket in terms of size and nutritional value but are from savanna areas.
Decorated / Banded / Tropical House Cricket (Gryllodes sigillatus) are a small Southern European cricket, rich in protein and have a long shelf life. They may prove to be more aggressive to terrarium inhabitants."

http://www.12forum.nl/forum/bericht.php?ID=1316&tID=180&fID=9
"Interestingly, pinhead crickets have a much higher calcium levels between 1.3 and 2.3% DM., giving them a calcium to phosphorous ratio of 1.6:1"

http://www.leopardgecko.co.uk/documents/caresheet/food.htm
"Cricket Nutritional Analysis
Cricket type Moisture Fat Ca Ratio Protein
Banded Cricket 71.8 6.3 0.64 16.5
Black Field Cricket 66.7 12.0 0.82 15.8
Silent Brown Cricket 68.8 9.3 0.77 16.4
Brown House Cricket 70.7 4.4 0.32 19.8
Source Reptilia Magazine"

Re: chitin content of black crickets...I can't find anything from a reliable source on it...but quite a few people mention it.

You said..."Also I know there some other species available,the question is should I bother using a variety or is this not important enough?"...hard to know since there isn't enough data available.

Sorry...I don't have time to post more right now. Hopefully others will answer too.

Thanks for all the trouble you've been through,useful info

You're welcome! I'm always looking for information on the nutritional value of insects anyhow. You'r question just made me look up my "old" information and look to see if I could find anything new.