Vol. 36 (2026): Volumen 36
Artículos de Investigación

Cultural and nutritional evaluation of the Mexican axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum): between gastronomic tradition and nutritional value

PDF (Español (España))
  • Gabriela Huerta Ávila,
  • Olimpia Chong Carrillo,
  • Cynthia Eugenia Montoya Martínez,
  • Martín A Aréchiga Palomera,
  • David Julián Palma Cancino,
  • Fernando Vega Villasante
Fernando Vega Villasante
Universidad de Guadalajara
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2026.4494

Published 2026-02-18

How to Cite

Huerta Ávila, G., Chong Carrillo, O., Montoya Martínez, C. E., Aréchiga Palomera, M. A., Palma Cancino, D. J., & Vega Villasante, F. (2026). Cultural and nutritional evaluation of the Mexican axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum): between gastronomic tradition and nutritional value. Acta Universitaria, 36, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2026.4494

Copyright (c) 2026 Gabriela Huerta Ávila, Olimpia Chong Carrillo, Cynthia Eugenia Montoya Martínez, Martín A Aréchiga Palomera, David Julián Palma Cancino, Fernando Vega Villasante

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Abstract

The Mexican axolotl (Ambystoma mexicanum), a neotenic amphibian endemic to Lake Xochimilco, faces severe threats due to urbanization, pollution, invasive species, and climate change. Historically, it was part of the traditional Mexican diet, but its current gastronomic use is questionable. This study evaluated its importance as a traditional food and its protein contribution to the human diet, analyzing its amino acid profile and comparing it with that of the frog. Results indicate that axolotl meat does not provide a significant nutritional contribution to humans, with protein digestibility-corrected chemical amino acid values ​​below optimal levels. It is concluded that the culinary consumption of the axolotl does not justify its exploitation, given its ecological and cultural importance. It is recommended to implement strict regulations, promote public awareness, and collaborate with conservation initiatives to protect this species and its habitat.

PDF (Español (España))

References

  1. Aguilar-Moreno, M. (2007). Handbook to life in the Aztec world. Oxford University Press.
  2. Bartra, R. (2011). Axolotiada: vida y mito de un anfibio mexicano (Tezontle). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  3. Basto-Rosales, M. E. R., Carrillo-Farnés, O., Montoya-Martínez, C. E., Badillo-Zapata, D., Rodríguez-Montes de Oca, G. G., Álvarez-González, C. A., Nolasco-Soria, H., & Vega, F. (2020). Meat protein quality of Dormitator latifrons (Pisces: Eleotridae): arguments for use by rural communities. Ecosistemas y Recursos Agropecuarios, 7(1), e2172. https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a7n1.2172
  4. Block, R. J., & Mitchell, H. H. (1946). The correlation of the amino acid composition of proteins with their nutritive value. Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews, 16(2), 249–278. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20063033553
  5. Favila-Cisneros, H., Quintero-Salazar, B., & Barrera García, V. D. (2010). “Del plato a la boca... el ajolote a la sopa” una mirada al patrimonio cultural gastronómico. Culinaria, 1, 75–89. http://web.uaemex.mx/Culinaria/uno_ne/art_04.pdf
  6. Figueroa-Serrano, D. (2021). Ecoestética del ajolote. Patrimonio biocultural y alimentación en la Región Mazahua. En R. Hernández-López, A. López-Ojeda, H. J. Favila-Cisneros, & C. Guzmán-Hernández (eds.), Gastronomía y Patrimonio. Estética de lo intangible (pp. 265–298). Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México.
  7. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). (1991). Protein quality evaluation. FAO. https://www.fao.org/ag/humannutrition/35978-02317b979a686a57aa4593304ffc17f06.pdf
  8. Jaime-Ceballos, B. J., Hernández-Llamas, A., Garcia-Galano, T., & Villarreal, H. (2006). Substitution of Chaetoceros muelleri by Spirulina platensis meal in diets for Litopenaeus schmitti larvae. Aquaculture, 260(1–4), 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2006.06.002
  9. Manzo-Ramos, F., & Albor, M. C. (2022). El ajolote y otros recursos en el Lago de Texcoco: Saberes de su patrimonio gastronómico. El Periplo Sustentable, (43), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.36677/elperiplo.v0i43.11553
  10. Ortega-Guerrero, B., Albarrán-Santos, M. A., Caballero, M., Reyes-Corona, I., Gutiérrez-Méndez, B., & Caballero-García, L. (2018). Reconstrucción paleoambiental de la subcuenca de Xochimilco, centro de México, entre 18000 y 5000 años antes del presente. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas, 35(3), 254–267. https://doi.org/10.22201/cgeo.20072902e.2018.3.779
  11. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología, 74(9), 790-799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016
  12. Shaw, G., & Nodder, F. P. (1798). A Mexican tadpole. The Naturalist’s Miscellany, 9, 267-269. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/124620
  13. Sosa, F. S. (2020). The impacts of climate change on water management in Mexico City: the urgency of strengthening adaptation capacities. Argumentos. Estudios Críticos de la Sociedad, 1(92), 81–102. https://doi.org/10.24275/uamxoc-dcsh/argumentos/202092-04
  14. Tate, C. E. (2010). The axolotl as food and symbol in the Basin of Mexico, from 1200 BC to today. En J. Staller & M. Carrasco (eds.), Pre-Columbian foodways (pp. 511–533). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0471-3_21
  15. Valerio-Holguín, F. (2019). La mexicanidad de Xólotl/Axolotl: maravilla de la literatura y la gastronomía. Mitologías Hoy, 19, 147–159. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/mitologias.622
  16. Vieira, C., de Almeida, M. G., Rosa, J. C., & Brunoro, N. M. (2006). Qualidade nutricional e escore químico de aminoácidos de diferentes fontes protéicas. Food Science and Technology, 26(1), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612006000100029