Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36469502›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Mopane worm value chain in Zimbabwe: Evidence on knowledge, practices, and processes in Gwanda District.

Faith A Manditsera, Juliet Mubaiwa, Tonderayi M Matsungo, Prosper Chopera, Sandra Bhatasara, George Kembo, Honest Mahlatini, Faith Matiza Ruzengwe, Felix Matutu, John Grigor and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Faith A ManditseraDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe.ORCID 0000-0001-7977-8162
Juliet MubaiwaDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe.
Tonderayi M MatsungoUniversity of Zimbabwe, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Prosper ChoperaUniversity of Zimbabwe, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Sandra BhatasaraUniversity of Zimbabwe, Mt Pleasant, Harare, Zimbabwe.
George KemboFood and Nutrition Council, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Honest MahlatiniFood and Nutrition Council, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Faith Matiza RuzengweDepartment of Food Science and Technology, Chinhoyi University of Technology, Chinhoyi, Zimbabwe.
Felix MatutuForestry Commission of Zimbabwe, Gwanda, Zimbabwe.
John GrigorDivision of Engineering and Food Science, Abertay University, Dundee, United Kingdom.
Alberto FioreDivision of Engineering and Food Science, Abertay University, Dundee, United Kingdom.
Lesley MachekaMarondera University of Agriculture Science and Technology, Marondera, Zimbabwe.ORCID 0000-0002-7878-6678

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/T009055/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Consumption of edible insects is a potential solution to the growing need for protein. However, the wild harvested edible insects' value chain faces several challenges including limited knowledge on indigenous practices in the harvesting and processing and lack of information on roles of the different actors in the chain. A case study of Gonimbrasia belina, colloquially referred to as the 'mopane worm', was conducted to understand and identify determinants of participation in the value chain of the edible caterpillar. A cross sectional study was conducted in Gwanda (a rural district in Zimbabwe) to (a) understand the indigenous knowledge on harvesting and processing methods, (b) explore value addition and the traditional beliefs surrounding the utilisation of the mopane worm. Results showed that consumers (81.7%), and harvesters (76.6%) were the main actors in the mopane worm value chain. Using the Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) model, the following were shown to be determinants of participation in the mopane worm value chain: (a) gender (b) household size (c) marital status (d) religion and (e) household assets. Two primary processing methods of harvested mopane worm were distinguished i.e., boiling and roasting on ambers. Results showed lack of diversity in mopane worm-based products. Current culturally acceptable processing techniques need improvement and standardization to support sustainable mopane worm processing while optimising nutrient bio-accessibility.

Indexed as

Edible InsectsFabaceaeAnimalsCross-Sectional StudiesHumansRural PopulationZimbabwe

Identifiers

PMID36469502
PMCPMC9721488

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.