Explore
Communities in English
Advertise on Engormix

Maximun tolerable concentrations of some mycotoxins: a review

Published: August 26, 2009
Summary
The maximum tolerable concentrations showed in Table 1, are a guidance and have been collected from a combination of scientific published articles concerning to the subject and essays with animals; experiences (40 years) and field observations in the animals about mycotoxicosis ; the legislation and recommendations published by the European Union. Table 1. Maximum tolerable concentrations (pp...
Related topics
Authors:
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
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
Arshaq Ramzee
1 de septiembre de 2009
Excellent work by the authors. It is a good ready reference documents for all. Now anyone can consult one single document.
Ganesh Kumar Dahal
Guybro Chemical
1 de septiembre de 2009

Good article !!

It is a handy referral chart for Maximum Tolerable Concentrations (MTC) of Major Mycotoxins for different animal species @ ppb per Kg.

Risk directly depends on level of aflatoxins and presence of other mycotoxins in the feed. For all practical purposes a level of MTC may be termed as safe provided the animals are in healthy condition.

Specially in poultry, the degree of susceptibility of Mycotoxin is influenced by many factors.

Age : Younger birds are more susceptible.

Health : Weak/stressed birds are more susceptible.

Feed : Low level of vitamins and amino acids may expose the birds to the problem.

Breeder : Breeders are more susceptible than commercial layer. Broilers are more susceptible than the layer birds.
Ducks are about 200 times more sensitive than layers & broilers.

Easy conversion:

1 ppm [equal] 106 (1 Million i.e. 10 Lakhs)
1 ppb [equal] 109 (1 billion i.e. 100 crores)
To convert ppm to ppb – move decimal point 3 places to the right e.g. 0.2 ppm [equal] 200 ppb
To convert ppb to ppm – move decimal point 3 places to the left e.g. 1200 ppb [equal] 1.2 ppm

Thanks,

Haroon Mushtaq
1 de septiembre de 2009

Hi

I think this article about mycotoxins is of regular nature because these values are discussed earlier in many articles and books.

ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
1 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Dr. Arshag, Thank you very much for your comments. Regards. Gimeno
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
1 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Mr. Ganesh, Thank you very much for your expression “Good article” and for your explanations. I agree with them and also that MTC levels may be termed as safe provided the animals are in healthy condition. In my article is possible to deduce this one from the two first paragraphs of de Comments. In order to be clear the concentration unit “ppb” I put “micrograms/Kg”. Regards. Gimeno
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
3 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Mr. Mirza, I would like to inform you that many of the levels showed in Table 1 are based on extensive field observations during 40 years, and obviously many of these levels can agree with other ones already published. Regards. Gimeno
Swamy Haladi
Swamy Haladi
9 de septiembre de 2009

Good reference point. However, the numbers given for DON for poultry is too high. Recent research has shown that DON can compromise poultry performance at levels as low as 2.5 ppm. Also we need to keep in mind that we never get individual mycotoxins in animal feed. If DON is present, there can be at least 10 other mycotoxins are present which we are not testing for. There are more than 100 trichothecene mycotoxins. Also it is logical to give limits for total fumonisins rather than FB1. Another variable factor is masked mycotoxins. These should be used as only guidelines and mere presence of mold or single mycotoxin should be handled with caution. Never interpret mycotoxin analysis in isolation. It is imp to consider animal symptoms and PM findings in conjunction with mycotoxin analysis report. We need to differentiate mycotoxicoses from other conditions or diseases which is always a challenge.

ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
9 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Mr. Swamy, Your point about the DON level of 2.5 ppm which seems that can compromise poultry performance is very interesting and I am grateful for the information. Tell me please where I can found the research that you mention, in order to take into account the results of this one in the future However, the study published by Awad, WA. Böhm, J. Razzazi-Fazeli, E. Zentek,J., from Department of Veterinary Public Health and Food Science, Institute of Nutrition, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Austria, in the J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. (Berl), 2006 Feb 90(1-2): 32-37, with the title “Effects of feeding deoxynivalenol contaminated wheat on growth performance, organ weights and histological parameters of the intestine of broiler chickens”, shows a results which do not agree with the level that you referred in your comments, al least for broiler chickens. The article above mentioned shows the following: A group of fifteen 1-day-old broiler chicks was fed with a diet naturally contaminated with 5 mg DON/Kg diet (5 ppm), during 21 days. Another (control) group was fed with a non contaminated diet, during 21 days. Deoxynivalenol (DON) had no effect (p > 0.05) on feed consumption, feed conversion, body-weight gain, live body weight or mortality. The absolute and relative weight of the organs (gizzard, pancreas, heart, spleen, colon and caecum) were not altered by the dietary inclusion of DON contaminated grain. No gross lesions were detected in any of the organs of birds fed contaminated diet during the feeding trial. However, this concentration of DON can affect small intestinal morphology in broilers but not the performance. On the other hand, old studies published about the subject showed that, feeds contaminated with 15 and 50 ppm of DON that were given to 6 day old chicks during 42 and 6 days, respectively, the highest concentration only produced few oral lesions. A diet contaminated with 16 ppm of DON (given during 21 days) not adversely affect performance and health of broilers. Dietary DON concentration of 6 ppm was given to Pekin ducks during 49 days and did not adversely affect performance and health of growing Pekin ducks. Day old turkey poults given feed containing 20 ppm of DON during a period of 21 days did not have any variations in daily feed intake, or in body weight gain, compared to the control group. There were no histological lesions or significant adverse effects However, the layers and breeders are more susceptible to DON as you can see in my Table 1. More of your other explanations agree with my comments in the article. The maximum tolerable concentration (MTC) levels may be termed as safe provided the animals are in healthy condition and without the presence of other mycotoxins (synergism or association amongst them). I agree with your other comments but if other factors are taking into account, like I mention in my first and second paragraph of my comments (including the masked mycotoxins, such as deoxynivalenol and zearalenone glucosides), it is almost impossible to establish a guidance for the maximum tolerable mycotoxins concentrations. If I found enough data which justify for reducing the MTC levels of DON in poultry (chickens, broilers, pullets, ducks and turkeys), I will reduce the MTC DON levels of my article in the future. Yours sincerely. Gimeno
Sharon Krmaer
9 de septiembre de 2009

Dear Mr. Gimeno,

Interesting article regarding dose response and mycotoxins in animals. I work with people who have experienced systems indicative of mycotoxicosis from exposure in water damaged buildings.

I am curious to know: When dose response guidelines are being established for farm animals, do you all ever do studies of how much mycotoxin enters the animals bodies via the routes of inhalation of airborne dust in the feed? Or how much they are being exposed to via dermal contact of stepping in it?

Sharon Kramer

Dr. Karki Kedar
10 de septiembre de 2009
mycotoxins are going to be 21st centurys mystry for nutrionist and vet nothing can be said about at which level and to which spp it will harm
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
10 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Mr. Swamy, I forgot to tell you about some references concerning to my previous comments, as follow: .- About DON levels (Broilers) of 15 and 50 ppm: Romer, T.R. (1983). Feedstuffs. April 11, pp.30-31. Halloran, H.R. (1983). Feedstuffs. May 2, p. 18 .- About DON level (Broilers) of 16 ppm: Dersjant-Li, Y. Verstegen, MW. Gerrits WJ. (2003). “The impact of low concentrations of aflatoxin, deoxynivalenol or fumonisin in diets on growing pigs and poultry”. Nutr. Res- Rev. Dec16(2):223-239. Animal Nutrition Group, Department of Animal Science, Wageningen UniversityPO Box 338, 6700 AH Wageningen, The Netherlands. Harvey, RB. Kubena, LF. Rottinghaus, GE. Turk, JR. Casper, HH. Buckley SA. (1997). “Moniliformin from Fusarium fujikuroi culture material and deoxynivalenol from naturally contaminated wheat incorporated into diets of broiler chicks”. Avian Dis.Oct-Dec41(4):957-963. United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Food Animal Protection Research Laboratory, College Station, TX 77845, USA. .- About DON level (Ducks) of 6 ppm: Dänicke, S. Ueberschär, KH. Valenta, H. Matthes, S. Matthäus. K. Halle I.(2004). “Effects of graded levels of Fusarium-toxin-contaminated wheat in Pekin duck diets on performance, health and metabolism of deoxynivalenol and zearalenone. Br. Poult. Sci. Apr45(2):264-72. Institute of Animal Nutrition, Federal Agricultural Research Centre, Braunschweig (FAL), Braunschweig, Germany. sven.daenicke@fal.de .- About DON levels (Turkey) of 20 ppm: Morris CM, Li YC, Ledoux DR, Bermudez AJ, Rottinghaus GE. (1999). “ The individual and combined effects of feeding moniliformin, supplied by Fusarium fujikuroi culture material, and deoxynivalenol in young turkey poults”. Poult Sci. 1999 Aug78(8):1110-1115. Department of Animal Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia 65211, USA. .- Abou DON levels (Broilers) of 10 ppm: I have other interesting reference which shows that a diet contaminated with 10 ppm of DON which was given to broilers during 42 days had no effect in the feed consumption, feed conversion, or body weight. It was absence on clinical signs and the performance was not impaired, but altered the gut function of broilers. Awad. WA. Böhm, J. Razzazi-Fazeli E. Hulan, HW. Zentek J.(2004) ”Effects of deoxynivalenol on general performance and electrophysiological properties of intestinal mucosa of broiler chickens” Poultry Sci. Dec83(12):1964-1972. Institute of Nutrition, Department of Veterinary Public Health and Food Science, University of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinärplatz 1, A-1210 Vienna, Austria. .- Apart from my extensive field observations. Sincerely Gimeno
Swamy Haladi! (Canada)
Swamy Haladi! (Canada)
10 de septiembre de 2009
Alberto, the references you provided to DON are bit old. By referring to the papers you indicated, I took up my PhD back in 2003 to determine whether poultry is really resistant to DON. From there on series of experiments were conducted at University of Guelph in Canada which were all published in Poultry Science Journal. Here are some references: Broilers: Swamy et al., 2004, Poultry Science 83:533–543, based on this limit can be set around 8 ppm DON for broiler chickens Turkeys: Girish et al., 2008, Poultry Science 87:421–432, based on this limit can be set around 2.5 ppm DON for turkeys For the references above you can argue that research was done using contamiated grains and there were other mycotoxins present, albeit at low levels. However, this is what birds face in the field, not the pure toxins or fungal culture materials which is used in several mycotoxin studies. You given limits for layers and breeders as 200 ppb. Please privide reference for this if possible. At the end of the day these are guidelines and can refined as new data comes in. We also need to give emphasis on the impact of mycotoxins on immunity which can happen before we see apparent performance problems. Let me know if you need further clarifications. Thanks.
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
10 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Mr. Swamy, About the DON in layers and breeders I have a reference concerning to a publication by Hamilton, R.M.G. Thompson, B.K. Trenholm, H.L. (1981). “Feed intake, egg production and shell quality of hens given diets that contained vomitoxin contaminated wheat”. Poultry Science 60: 1666 (Abstract). According to the article, wheat-soybean diets containing 0.35 to 0.7 ppm DON were fed to laying pullets from 192 to 262 days of age (10 weeks). Diets had no effect in performance (body weight gain, feed intake and efficiency – kg feed/dozen and kg feed/kg egg). However, egg and shell weight, shell thickness and percent shell decreased linearly with increasing levels of dietary DON. Due to this big difference of DON undesirable effects susceptibility between broilers and layers, I made a field trial (many years ago) similar to the above mentioned but with layers and breeders feeding natural contaminated diets with 0,1; 0.2; 0.25; 0.35; 0.5 and 0.7 ppm DON contamination levels (not other known mycotoxins were present according to the minimum detectable concentration of the analytical method which was used). For 0.35 to 0.7 ppm DON contamination levels, the results were the same that the before mentioned in the Hamilton et al, article. However, with the 0.1 to 0.25 ppm DON contamination levels, there were no problems with egg and shell weight, shell thickness, percent shell and with the performance. Therefore I decided set the limit of 0.2 ppm. About the DON in broiler chickens and turkeys, I respect your data but I also respect old data already published, several of them agree with a limit of 15 ppm DON contamination level, even more, in feed for broiler chickens and turkeys. I am grateful for your information and I consider that the articles published by Swamy et al. (2004) and Girish et al. (2008) are very good articles. It is obvious that a limit of 8 ppm DON for broilers and 2.5 ppm DON for turkeys are safer than 15 ppm. Therefore I will take into account these data in the future. When I decided to publish my article, my principal idea, was for giving to the people a guidance about de maximum tolerable concentrations of some mycotoxins, and create a discussion forum for improving (if necessary) the data which are already showed. Thanks. Gimeno
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
11 de septiembre de 2009

Dear Sharon,

Very good question indeed, because is not usual take into consideration the possible airborne mycotoxins contamination which can influence the results in the trials even in a normal mycotoxicosis. However, I have no idea what can be the magnitude of this influence, because nowadays many farms have ventilation and air renewal systems even in the place where the trials with the animals are done.

The possibility of airborne mycotoxins contaminations even the exposition to via dermal contact are not taking into consideration when the guidances about the subject are being established.

There is a big variability with the airborne mycotoxins contaminations and dermal contact.

I know that usually the mycotoxins actually produced in water-damaged building are the macrocyclic trichothecenes (verrucarins, roridins, stratoxins …etc) produced by severals Stachybotrys spp. However, it seems that the toxicity of macrocyclic trichotecenes has not been sufficiently studied, at least for animals, specially for poultry.

Regards.

Gimeno

ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
12 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Swamy About DON natural contaminations in feed for layers and breeders, I forgot say you the following: apart from the trials, field observations showed no problems with egg and shell weight, shell thickness and percent shell with 0.05 to 0.3 ppm DON, but there were problems with 0.4 to 1 ppm DON natural contaminations. No conjugated-DON was present. The problems with 0.4 ppm were less severe than with 0.5 ppm or more. The DON feed contaminations results were obtained using HPLC analytical methods. Not “Elisa” methods. Regards. Gimeno
Abideen Busari
15 de septiembre de 2009

I READ WITH GREAT INTEREST YOUR ARTICLE,BUT THE BASIC PROBLEM IS THAT IT IS A VERY COMPLEX PROCEDURE TO ESTABLISH UNIVERSALLY MAXIMUM LEVEL OF MYCOTOXIN THAT ARE TOLERABLE IN ANILMAL FEEDS.IT ACTUALLY DEPENDS NOT ONLY ON THE BREED OR SPECIES OF THE ANILMAL BUT ALSO ON GEOGRAPHICAL FACTOR.FOR EXAMPLE IN AFRICA,VERGITATION THAT MIGHT BE POISONOUS TO A BREED OF CATTLE CALLED ABERDEEN ANGERS ARE GIVEN TO CATTLES IN NIGERIA. SAID THIS,I THINK WE CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT REDUCTION IN MYCOTOXINS IN ANILMAL FEED.MYCOTOXINS ARE FORMIDABLE IN GRAINS AND NUTS.WE CAN DO SOME WASHING AND DRY PROCEDURE IN GRAINS TO REDUCE THE LEVEL OF TOXIN,BUT WE CAN NOT APPLY THE SAME PROCEDURE IN NUTS AS MOST FEED FORMATION ARE NOT USING NUTS PER SE BUT REMINANTS AFTER OIL HAS BEEN EXTRACTED.THE REMINANTS ARE VULNERABLE TO THE FORMATION OF MYCOTOXIN IF IT IS KEPT FOR A LONG TIME.HOW CAN WE KNOW THIS AS OUR SOURCE ARE MOSTLY FROM VERGITABLE OIL MAKING FACTORY.ANYWAY THE BEST ANSWER WOULD BE TO USE THE NUT CAKE AS SOON AS WE GET IT. IN SOME CASES SUN FLOWER IS ADDED TO FEED FORMATION AS ORGANIC REMEDY TO REDUCE THE EFFECT OF MYCOTOXINS IN THE FEED.

ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
16 de septiembre de 2009

Dear Mr. Abideen,

I think that I was clear in my comments about the difficulties to establish guidance levels and/or recommendations about mycotoxins.

I think also that from legislation, guidance and/or recommendations maximum levels of mycotoxins in feeds, from European Union (EU), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Food Agricultural Organization (FAO) and others, even from my Table 1 in the article, the technical people can establish guidance levels according to the occurrence of mycotoxicological problems in the geographical area were they are working, and taking into account the different factors in that area, as you mention. However, an initial guideline is always necessary.

It is obvious that the optimum maximum levels of mycotoxins in feeds and foods are 0, but is also obvious that it is not possible. Some times in several countries, is necessary to decide if the animals die hungry or with a mycotoxicosis. But I agree that using several strategies, the mycotoxins contamination levels in feeds and foods should be reduced.

Yours Sincerely.


Gimeno

Shami Alssafi
19 de septiembre de 2009
Dear Dr. Alberto your topic is very interested because i was worked in this field for two years as M.Sc. project in presence of AFB in peanut kernel and peanut butter. i was found that the minimum level in three samples only 13.45, 14.98 and 14.54 with maximum level of 404.00 this show that the third world is struggle against these toxins so please, advice me to solve this problem.
ALBERTO GIMENO
Alberto Gimeno
22 de septiembre de 2009

Dear Dr. Shami,

Are the aflatoxin contaminations showed in you comments, ppb (micrograms/Kg) or ppm (mg/Kg)?

For animals, the use of mycotoxins detoxifier in feeds is a good strategy and practice.

On the other hand, the roasting of peanuts at 150-200ºC during 30 minutes, can reduce 40-80% the aflatoxin concentration.

The treatment of the peanut with calcium hydroxide-monomethylamine, can reduce the aflatoxin concentration more than 98%. The protein digestibility is 85% (peanut not treated) and 82% (peanut treated). The availability of net protein is 56% (peanut not treated) and 47% (peanut treated).

You can consult several detoxification strategies for peanut and peanut butter going to:

http://books.google.pt/books?id=Zg9mT9zu3IAC&pg=PA174&lpg=PA174&dq=aflatoxin +detoxification+in+peanut+butter&source=bl&ots=uNE1jDafkd&sig=K5pheSIRhTt61YzKOYFYAellUFY&hl=pt-PT&ei=4UC5SrvBJcOc_Aan4ZTbBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=aflatoxin%20detoxification%20in%20peanut%20butter&f=false

In the chapter: Effect of Processing on Aflatoxin

Sincerely.

Gimeno

Jimmy Wan
31 de marzo de 2010
its a very informative article, thx the author for a very good job!
12
Join Engormix and be part of the largest agribusiness social network in the world.
LoginRegister