Brazilian experiences with mycotoxins by Douglas Zaviezo
Published: March 19, 2009
Related topics
Authors:
Join to be able to comment.
Once you join Engormix, you will be able to participate in all content and forums.
* Required information
Would you like to discuss another topic? Create a new post to engage with experts in the community.
Create a post
Special Nutrients
29 de abril de 2009
In reference to the first comment asking about the dosages and levels of mycotoxins used by Lamic, you can find them on the Special Report comment that indicates all the trials with TARGET ORGAN results with the level of mycotoxin and dosage of Mycoad and Mycoad AZ used in each experiment.
Special Nutrients
23 de abril de 2009
Special Report: Mycotoxins 2009 conference
This report is based on the presentations and materials available during the Mycotoxins 2009 conference held in Bangkok, Thailand one day before VIV Asia. It was successfully organized by Positive Action with around 150 attendees.
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos specially the round table video at Engormix.
The Special Report has four parts:
1. Summary and highlights of the questions and answers of the round table
2. Key questions to ask when viewing presentations and round table
3. Topics that two or more of the participating companies agreed on
4. Key points of Special Nutrients presentation and literature
1. Summary and highlights of the questions and answers of the round table.
1. Can Aflatoxin be degraded by enzymes? (Made to all the panel)
Aflatoxin can be degraded by enzymes, but it is cheaper to use clays.
The problem with enzymes is that can they be destroyed by pelletization. Also the metabolites produced by the enzymes can be as toxic, or more toxic than the original compound.
Clays have the potential problem of absorbing nutrients and antibiotics.
All clays are different. (All agreed).
With In Vivo testing you can see that clays are different.
In Vitro testing is not proof of efficacy. You need In Vivo scientific studies to proof the efficacy. (All agreed).
2. Do mycotoxin binders work on the toxins, not only found in the feed, but also ingested from the litter? (Made to all the panel)
A good toxin binder will work on toxins found in the feed and also ingested from the litter. All mycotoxin binders where they do the adsorption and/or detoxification is in the GI track of the animal. No toxin binder works in feed.
3. Is there any sensitivity data of the EU (Eubacterium BBSH 797) bacterium used in Biomin products, since many countries in Asia still use antibiotics? (Made to Biomin)
EU bacterium is sensitive to some antibiotics; a list of them is available upon request
4. Based on LAMIC’s trials on target organs, which of the products have been approved, for which species and which mycotoxins? (Made to all the panel)
Special Nutrients indicated that LAMIC has approved Myco-Ad A-Z for Fumonisin and Zearalenone in pigs. Myco-Ad is approved for Aflatoxin and Fumonisin in poultry and Aflatoxin in swine.
Biomin, Impextraco and Kemin did not reply.
Alltech affirmed that Mycosorb is approved by the Brazilian government except for Fumonisin. (Alltech did not specify if the approval referd too is of the OLD or NEW legislation)
5. What is the mode of action of clays? Selective binding or blind binding? (Made to all the panel)
Clays can vary on the type of mycotoxin that they can adsorb because each clay is naturally different and also because of the process that the clay is submitted to, you can change the type of mycotoxin that it can bind. It is easy to verify if a clay is adsorbing a specific mycotoxin through the effect on target organs and/or residues of the mycotoxins in the feces of the animal.
6. Same question as number 4 but with emphasis on the NEW Brazilian regulations which products are approved by LAMIC? (Made to all the panel)
Special Nutrients (see answer on question 4).
Kemin indicated that they are not approved in Brazil. Biomin and Impextraco did not reply.
This time Alltech gave an answer that had no relationship to the question asked.
7. Is the dosage of product dependent on the level of mycotoxin? (Made to all the panel)
Yes it is dose dependant however since in feed there is only ppb of mycotoxin the dosage is not such a big of an issue even if you use 1 kg or 2 kg of product.
8. Is CEC relevant for clay binders? (Made to all the panel)
CEC is no longer a parameter to differentiate clays. (all agreed)
9. Enzymatic vs. bacterial degradation of mycotoxin? (Made to Biomin and Impextraco)
Impextraco responded that:
a) The use of bacteria and/or yeast competes with the existing flora
b) Since bacterium comes from the rumen of a cow, how can it be active in the GI track of a chicken or a pig?
c) Antibiotics used in feed affect the bacterium, using enzymes you have immediate protection.
Biomin indicated that there were no published papers to prove those claims. Impextraco replied that he had presented the data during their presentation.
Biomin indicated that they have scientific papers In Vitro and In Vivo to prove that with their bacteria also works In Vivo.
10. Are universities adequately training on the subject of mycotoxins? (Made to all the panel)
Generally universities are not teaching enough, but they are improving compared to the past. (All agreed).
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos
2. Key questions to ask when viewing presentations and round table
When viewing all the presentations including round table and literature available during the event the critical questions to ask are:
1) How many in vivo trials demonstrating efficacy against different mycotoxins in several species were presented by each company?
2) How many of them focused on target organ results?
3) Why the information on clays presented by some companies indicating that they only adbsorb Aflatoxin is based on old information (20th century) and not on current scientific information (21st century)? Have they looked at the in vivo trials reported in several scientific meetings showing the effectiveness of some clays against other mycotoxins beside Aflatoxin?
4) When looking at the summaries and tables that report in vivo trial results check for answers to the following questions to demonstrate the validity of the experiment:
Quantity vs. quality? (Statistical significance compared to positive influence or lack of efficacy).
Parameters measured? (target organs, immune system, production parameters, etc).
Concentration and type of mycotoxins .
Product dosage.
5) Does the product have a ‘masking’ effect and is acting as a growth promoter as indicated during the Mycotoxins 2009 conferences by some of the speakers? By only showing production performance and/or effect on the immune system without showing any specific effect on target organs (weight, appearance, histological changes) the real effectiveness of the mycotoxins binder is not demonstrated.
6) When bio-transformation by enzymes and/or bacteria occurs are the metabolites produced safe for the animals and humans consuming the product?
Bio-transformation by bacteria and/or enzymes already occurs in nature, for example in the ruminal fluid of a cow. In the case of Zearalenone, it is bio-transformed into Zearalenol, a compound 10 times more estrogenic than Zearalenone.
7) How heat, antibiotics, pathogenic bacteria and stress can affect bio-transformation by enzymes and/or bacteria?
8) Why talk about in vitro trials if everybody agrees that there is no relationship between in vitro efficacy and in vivo efficacy?
9) Is the product approved by the Brazilian government under the OLD registration or under the NEW legislation with LAMIC trials implemented in 2007?
3. Topics that two or more of the participating companies agreed on
Masked mycotoxins cannot be detected by regular methods of analysis. Mycotoxin levels are usually undervalued.
Mycotoxins levels have increased in the past years due to climate changes and other factors.
There is a big interaction and synergistic effect between pathogenic bacteria and mycotoxins.
Mycotoxins affect the immune system. Mycotoxins affect GI track.
Fusarium toxins are becoming a more predominant problem. Fumonisin is the biggest mycotoxin problem all over the world in corn and its by- products.
In Vitro testing is not sufficient proof of the efficacy of a toxin binder since products can work In Vitro and not In Vivo.
There are no two clays alike due to their nature and manufacturing process. All clays are different, most clays can only capture Aflatoxin, but some clays and/or combination of clays can capture several types of mycotoxins.
Improving productivity parameters or the immune system is no proof that a product is a mycotoxin binder since there are numerous compounds that can mask the secondary effects of mycotoxins or act as growth promoters.
The efficacy of a mycotoxin binder has to be done with In Vivo trials that include statistical results on target organ to prove the efficacy of a specific mycotoxin on a specific organ.
The use of enzymes and/or bacteria to bio-transform mycotoxins could be very dangerous because it can be bio-transformed into metabolites that are more toxic than the original one.
Universities need to increase the amount of courses/classes on mycotoxins.
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos.
4. Special Nutrients key points of presentation and literature
The Brazilian government created a scientific evaluation for the approval of anti-mycotoxin additives, becoming the only government in the world to have scientific regulations on mycotoxin binders. LAMIC under the direction of Prof. C. Mallmann, is one of the key university/institutions assigned for the implementation of this approval process.
Approval by LAMIC is not given to products that only improve production parameters since many compounds can mask the secondary effects of mycotoxins or act as growth promoters. Approval is given when there is a statistically significant lack of negative effect on the target organ and/or biomarker affected by the mycotoxin tested.
LAMIC has already conducted many in vivo trials and close to 30% of the products evaluated have passed this rigorous testing. Thirty products have been approved and 29 are clays. In the case of poultry, 18 have been approved for Aflatoxin and 2 for Fumonisin. For swine 3 products for Aflatoxin, 6 for Zearalenone and 1 for Fumonisin control.
Special Nutrients have presented five In Vivo trials to the Brazilian authorities. All trials show target organ results done by LAMIC to obtain approval by the Brazilian government. The trials were performed against Aflatoxin and Fumonisin in poultry and Aflatoxin in swine using Mycoad. The other 2 trials were against Zearalenone and Fumonisin in swine with Myco-Ad AZ. (See levels of mycotoxins and dosage of product below)
Literature was available during the event and consisted of:
Target organ brochure on poultry showing Myco-Ad studies against Aflatoxin (liver) Ochratoxin (kidney) and T-2 (oral lesions) in poultry. Target organ brochure for swine showing Myco-Ad AZ against Zearalenone (reproductive organs), Vomitoxin (liver) and Fumonisin (lung) in swine. A one page document with an article on “Brazil taking action on the problem of mycotoxins” and a summary of Myco-Ad and Myco-Ad AZ effectiveness In Vitro, In Vivo with statistical target organ results and approvals by Brazilian government (LAMIC) all indicate level of mycotoxin used and dosage of product.
Myco-Ad in Poultry tested against Aflatoxin 7500 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA), Aflatoxin 2800 ppb @ 2.5 kg (LAMIC), Ochratoxin 2000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA), Fumonisin 100,000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (LAMIC), T-2 1000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (VMI), 1250 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA). Myco-Ad in Swine tested against Aflatoxin 1000 ppb @ 5.0 kg (LAMIC)
Myco-Ad A-Z in Poultry against 1250 ppb T-2 @ 2.5 kg (IIIA). Myco-Ad A-Z in Swine against Fumonisin 30000 ppb @ 5.0 kg in piglets (LAMIC), Fumonisin 25000 ppb @ 4 kg finishing pigs (LAMIC), Zearalenone 700 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy), Zearalenone 1200 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy), Zearalenone 2000 ppb @ 5.0 kg (LAMIC), Vomitoxin 6000 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy).
During the VIV Asia, Special Nutrients had an hour-long seminar titled “The hidden factor behind respiratory diseases in swine”. It showed the direct relationship between PMWS, PRRS and Fumonisin that it has been emphasis by this company for the past 5 years. The common targets between them: immune system, gastrointestinal diseases and respiratory problems. In VIV China 2008 a very similar seminar was given with the title “The hidden factor behind PRRS and PMWS”.
This report is based on the presentations and materials available during the Mycotoxins 2009 conference held in Bangkok, Thailand one day before VIV Asia. It was successfully organized by Positive Action with around 150 attendees.
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos specially the round table video at Engormix.
The Special Report has four parts:
1. Summary and highlights of the questions and answers of the round table
2. Key questions to ask when viewing presentations and round table
3. Topics that two or more of the participating companies agreed on
4. Key points of Special Nutrients presentation and literature
1. Summary and highlights of the questions and answers of the round table.
1. Can Aflatoxin be degraded by enzymes? (Made to all the panel)
Aflatoxin can be degraded by enzymes, but it is cheaper to use clays.
The problem with enzymes is that can they be destroyed by pelletization. Also the metabolites produced by the enzymes can be as toxic, or more toxic than the original compound.
Clays have the potential problem of absorbing nutrients and antibiotics.
All clays are different. (All agreed).
With In Vivo testing you can see that clays are different.
In Vitro testing is not proof of efficacy. You need In Vivo scientific studies to proof the efficacy. (All agreed).
2. Do mycotoxin binders work on the toxins, not only found in the feed, but also ingested from the litter? (Made to all the panel)
A good toxin binder will work on toxins found in the feed and also ingested from the litter. All mycotoxin binders where they do the adsorption and/or detoxification is in the GI track of the animal. No toxin binder works in feed.
3. Is there any sensitivity data of the EU (Eubacterium BBSH 797) bacterium used in Biomin products, since many countries in Asia still use antibiotics? (Made to Biomin)
EU bacterium is sensitive to some antibiotics; a list of them is available upon request
4. Based on LAMIC’s trials on target organs, which of the products have been approved, for which species and which mycotoxins? (Made to all the panel)
Special Nutrients indicated that LAMIC has approved Myco-Ad A-Z for Fumonisin and Zearalenone in pigs. Myco-Ad is approved for Aflatoxin and Fumonisin in poultry and Aflatoxin in swine.
Biomin, Impextraco and Kemin did not reply.
Alltech affirmed that Mycosorb is approved by the Brazilian government except for Fumonisin. (Alltech did not specify if the approval referd too is of the OLD or NEW legislation)
5. What is the mode of action of clays? Selective binding or blind binding? (Made to all the panel)
Clays can vary on the type of mycotoxin that they can adsorb because each clay is naturally different and also because of the process that the clay is submitted to, you can change the type of mycotoxin that it can bind. It is easy to verify if a clay is adsorbing a specific mycotoxin through the effect on target organs and/or residues of the mycotoxins in the feces of the animal.
6. Same question as number 4 but with emphasis on the NEW Brazilian regulations which products are approved by LAMIC? (Made to all the panel)
Special Nutrients (see answer on question 4).
Kemin indicated that they are not approved in Brazil. Biomin and Impextraco did not reply.
This time Alltech gave an answer that had no relationship to the question asked.
7. Is the dosage of product dependent on the level of mycotoxin? (Made to all the panel)
Yes it is dose dependant however since in feed there is only ppb of mycotoxin the dosage is not such a big of an issue even if you use 1 kg or 2 kg of product.
8. Is CEC relevant for clay binders? (Made to all the panel)
CEC is no longer a parameter to differentiate clays. (all agreed)
9. Enzymatic vs. bacterial degradation of mycotoxin? (Made to Biomin and Impextraco)
Impextraco responded that:
a) The use of bacteria and/or yeast competes with the existing flora
b) Since bacterium comes from the rumen of a cow, how can it be active in the GI track of a chicken or a pig?
c) Antibiotics used in feed affect the bacterium, using enzymes you have immediate protection.
Biomin indicated that there were no published papers to prove those claims. Impextraco replied that he had presented the data during their presentation.
Biomin indicated that they have scientific papers In Vitro and In Vivo to prove that with their bacteria also works In Vivo.
10. Are universities adequately training on the subject of mycotoxins? (Made to all the panel)
Generally universities are not teaching enough, but they are improving compared to the past. (All agreed).
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos
2. Key questions to ask when viewing presentations and round table
When viewing all the presentations including round table and literature available during the event the critical questions to ask are:
1) How many in vivo trials demonstrating efficacy against different mycotoxins in several species were presented by each company?
2) How many of them focused on target organ results?
3) Why the information on clays presented by some companies indicating that they only adbsorb Aflatoxin is based on old information (20th century) and not on current scientific information (21st century)? Have they looked at the in vivo trials reported in several scientific meetings showing the effectiveness of some clays against other mycotoxins beside Aflatoxin?
4) When looking at the summaries and tables that report in vivo trial results check for answers to the following questions to demonstrate the validity of the experiment:
Quantity vs. quality? (Statistical significance compared to positive influence or lack of efficacy).
Parameters measured? (target organs, immune system, production parameters, etc).
Concentration and type of mycotoxins .
Product dosage.
5) Does the product have a ‘masking’ effect and is acting as a growth promoter as indicated during the Mycotoxins 2009 conferences by some of the speakers? By only showing production performance and/or effect on the immune system without showing any specific effect on target organs (weight, appearance, histological changes) the real effectiveness of the mycotoxins binder is not demonstrated.
6) When bio-transformation by enzymes and/or bacteria occurs are the metabolites produced safe for the animals and humans consuming the product?
Bio-transformation by bacteria and/or enzymes already occurs in nature, for example in the ruminal fluid of a cow. In the case of Zearalenone, it is bio-transformed into Zearalenol, a compound 10 times more estrogenic than Zearalenone.
7) How heat, antibiotics, pathogenic bacteria and stress can affect bio-transformation by enzymes and/or bacteria?
8) Why talk about in vitro trials if everybody agrees that there is no relationship between in vitro efficacy and in vivo efficacy?
9) Is the product approved by the Brazilian government under the OLD registration or under the NEW legislation with LAMIC trials implemented in 2007?
3. Topics that two or more of the participating companies agreed on
Masked mycotoxins cannot be detected by regular methods of analysis. Mycotoxin levels are usually undervalued.
Mycotoxins levels have increased in the past years due to climate changes and other factors.
There is a big interaction and synergistic effect between pathogenic bacteria and mycotoxins.
Mycotoxins affect the immune system. Mycotoxins affect GI track.
Fusarium toxins are becoming a more predominant problem. Fumonisin is the biggest mycotoxin problem all over the world in corn and its by- products.
In Vitro testing is not sufficient proof of the efficacy of a toxin binder since products can work In Vitro and not In Vivo.
There are no two clays alike due to their nature and manufacturing process. All clays are different, most clays can only capture Aflatoxin, but some clays and/or combination of clays can capture several types of mycotoxins.
Improving productivity parameters or the immune system is no proof that a product is a mycotoxin binder since there are numerous compounds that can mask the secondary effects of mycotoxins or act as growth promoters.
The efficacy of a mycotoxin binder has to be done with In Vivo trials that include statistical results on target organ to prove the efficacy of a specific mycotoxin on a specific organ.
The use of enzymes and/or bacteria to bio-transform mycotoxins could be very dangerous because it can be bio-transformed into metabolites that are more toxic than the original one.
Universities need to increase the amount of courses/classes on mycotoxins.
We strongly encourage you to view all the presentations videos.
4. Special Nutrients key points of presentation and literature
The Brazilian government created a scientific evaluation for the approval of anti-mycotoxin additives, becoming the only government in the world to have scientific regulations on mycotoxin binders. LAMIC under the direction of Prof. C. Mallmann, is one of the key university/institutions assigned for the implementation of this approval process.
Approval by LAMIC is not given to products that only improve production parameters since many compounds can mask the secondary effects of mycotoxins or act as growth promoters. Approval is given when there is a statistically significant lack of negative effect on the target organ and/or biomarker affected by the mycotoxin tested.
LAMIC has already conducted many in vivo trials and close to 30% of the products evaluated have passed this rigorous testing. Thirty products have been approved and 29 are clays. In the case of poultry, 18 have been approved for Aflatoxin and 2 for Fumonisin. For swine 3 products for Aflatoxin, 6 for Zearalenone and 1 for Fumonisin control.
Special Nutrients have presented five In Vivo trials to the Brazilian authorities. All trials show target organ results done by LAMIC to obtain approval by the Brazilian government. The trials were performed against Aflatoxin and Fumonisin in poultry and Aflatoxin in swine using Mycoad. The other 2 trials were against Zearalenone and Fumonisin in swine with Myco-Ad AZ. (See levels of mycotoxins and dosage of product below)
Literature was available during the event and consisted of:
Target organ brochure on poultry showing Myco-Ad studies against Aflatoxin (liver) Ochratoxin (kidney) and T-2 (oral lesions) in poultry. Target organ brochure for swine showing Myco-Ad AZ against Zearalenone (reproductive organs), Vomitoxin (liver) and Fumonisin (lung) in swine. A one page document with an article on “Brazil taking action on the problem of mycotoxins” and a summary of Myco-Ad and Myco-Ad AZ effectiveness In Vitro, In Vivo with statistical target organ results and approvals by Brazilian government (LAMIC) all indicate level of mycotoxin used and dosage of product.
Myco-Ad in Poultry tested against Aflatoxin 7500 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA), Aflatoxin 2800 ppb @ 2.5 kg (LAMIC), Ochratoxin 2000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA), Fumonisin 100,000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (LAMIC), T-2 1000 ppb @ 2.5 kg (VMI), 1250 ppb @ 2.5 kg (IIIA). Myco-Ad in Swine tested against Aflatoxin 1000 ppb @ 5.0 kg (LAMIC)
Myco-Ad A-Z in Poultry against 1250 ppb T-2 @ 2.5 kg (IIIA). Myco-Ad A-Z in Swine against Fumonisin 30000 ppb @ 5.0 kg in piglets (LAMIC), Fumonisin 25000 ppb @ 4 kg finishing pigs (LAMIC), Zearalenone 700 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy), Zearalenone 1200 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy), Zearalenone 2000 ppb @ 5.0 kg (LAMIC), Vomitoxin 6000 ppb @ 1.0 kg (Trilogy).
During the VIV Asia, Special Nutrients had an hour-long seminar titled “The hidden factor behind respiratory diseases in swine”. It showed the direct relationship between PMWS, PRRS and Fumonisin that it has been emphasis by this company for the past 5 years. The common targets between them: immune system, gastrointestinal diseases and respiratory problems. In VIV China 2008 a very similar seminar was given with the title “The hidden factor behind PRRS and PMWS”.
Kemin Industries, Inc
20 de marzo de 2009
One of the best presentations of the meeting with a good approach to mycotoxin binder evaluation with the target organs. It would be also interesting to know the dose of the product that allowed to minimise consequences of such a high contamination with studied mycotoxins.
You may be interested in
