superworms clean – A new paper in PLoS ONE suggests that larvae of Zophobas morio—“superworms” sold as pet food—could offer museums and forensics a safer way to clean skeletal specimens than dermestid beetles, which can escape and cause infestations.
For museums and forensic labs, cleaning skeletal specimens is a balancing act with real consequences. Bones have to be stripped of every trace of soft tissue—without being harmed in the process.
A new paper published in PLoS ONE points to an unexpected tool: the larvae of “superworms” (Zophobas morio), a common pet food. The promise is straightforward. Use a method that can remove flesh efficiently, but reduce the risks that come with relying on dermestid beetles.
Cleaning skeletal remains has never been simple. Burial. digestive enzymes. and chemical treatments all exist. but they each bring their own costs and compromises. including the possibility of damaging bones. long processing times. expensive operational costs. or environmentally hazardous substances.
Over time, dermestid beetles have become the preferred method for skeletal cleaning. They can remove soft tissue without damaging the bone. But they carry a troubling downside: if containment isn’t strict, beetles can escape, lay eggs, and trigger infestations. For institutions guarding irreplaceable collections, that’s the kind of risk that can’t be taken lightly.
That’s where the idea of switching to superworms enters the story. Fatemeh Rastekar of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad in Iran, along with co-authors, proposed that superworms could deliver similar benefits while avoiding the infestation problem.
The reasoning begins with biology and practical handling. Dermestid beetle colonies include all life stages, which means they require complex containment. Superworm cleaning, by contrast, uses only the larval stage. That larval period lasts 10–12 weeks, compared with just five to seven weeks for the beetles. The longer larval window changes the workflow. but it also simplifies what comes next: the larvae don’t pupate in crowded conditions. That makes it easier to manage colonies while reducing the risk of escape.
Still, the real question was efficiency. Could superworms match dermestid beetles at the core job—cleaning soft tissue away from bone cleanly enough for display or forensic use?
To test it, Rastekar et al. collected several donated specimens of various sizes and species. They then cleaned the specimens using commercially available superworms. The list included an Egyptian rosette. a house mouse. a little bittern. an alligator gar. a Eurasian eagle-owl. a rook. a wild cat. and a gray wolf.
They also ran a parallel comparison. Alongside the superworm cleaning, they cleaned the skeleton of a marbled polecat using a conventional boiling method to remove the flesh.
The report centers on whether superworms can deliver the same practical cleaning advantages without the containment nightmares that have pushed museums toward beetles—then forced them to worry about what happens if beetles get out.
superworms Zophobas morio dermestid beetles skeletal cleaning museum specimens forensic studies PLoS ONE infestation risk bone preservation
So they’re basically using pet food worms to clean bones? That feels weirdly perfect for museums I guess.
Wait, if the dermestid beetles escape then that’s like… an actual infestation in a building? People don’t realize how fast that can get out of hand. Superworms sound safer but also aren’t they still bugs that can crawl away? idk.
I read somewhere that beetles are basically safer than chemicals, so why are they even trying to change it? Also “superworms” sounds like some marketing thing lol. Are they gonna turn forensic labs into pet stores now?
They say the superworms take 10-12 weeks but beetles take 5-7 right? So wouldn’t that be slower and more expensive? Like if the whole point is safer, okay, but longer time usually means more cost too. Plus I’m confused because if it’s larvae only… what about eggs? Maybe they just don’t hatch or something.