engormix
search
search
We will be present at:
November 22, 2021 to November 24, 2021
Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates

Mycotoxin report and Management

remove_red_eye 2076 forum 31 bar_chart Statistics share
Share :
close
Video information
See more
mohammad aslam mohammad aslam
Specialist in Animal Nutrition
July 18, 2019

Thank you for an excellent work and reporting. The best preventive strategy against mycotoxin in feed is the best selection of grains and raw material, compromising on sub-standard grains a little bit with cheaper prices that will cost you more in terms of bird performance. Even low or mild levels of mycotoxins in feed do not show the deleterious signs and symptoms but still there is something wrong at sub-clinical levels and you have to pay in case of performance and efficiency.

Reply
July 30, 2019

mohammad aslam, thanks a lot for your comment, I absolutely agree with your opinion. Mycotoxin sorbtion is the final step to combat against mycotoxins. The first step of mycotoxin prevention is to use natural fungi antagonists, such as bacteria, during plants growth. it is necessary to start from the field! My firm is producer of bacteria (not GMO), highly antagonistic against fungi (Fusarium sp., Aspergillus sp., Penicillium sp. and other). In contrast of sorbents, some bacteries can destroy mycotoxins using enzymes. It is not binding process, it is direct destroying of mycotoxin molecules, and it is no risk to decrease vitamines content in the feed. My email is marchenkov150@gmail.com, welcome.

Reply
July 18, 2019
That's very true but I must add that even if you use the best grain, the problem starts when the feed is produced, taken to farms and kept in bad storage conditions where the conditions are very conducive to form molds and gradually gets severe. So in my humble opinion, prevention is better than cure and toxin binder must be used if not to eradicate completely but at least to prevent it to a greater extent.
We are suffering because we are penny wise miser and pound foolish. Thanks.
Reply
mohammad aslam mohammad aslam
Specialist in Animal Nutrition
July 24, 2019
Mian Tariq Pervaiz then why not we should use mold inhibitors in feed as mycotoxins are fungal metabolites as you say prevention is better than cure, we should prevent mold growth in feed.
Reply
John Kaijage John Kaijage
PhD in Tropical Animal Production
July 19, 2019

Thank you very much for the report and management of mycotoxin. Actually, mycotoxin is a very critical issue in the livestock production particularly poultry production. Most of the feed ingredients used in compounding poultry feeds such as maize, sorghum and sunflower seed meal are prone to mycotoxin. These are toxic substances produced by different types fungi and have different effects depending on type mycotoxin, dosage, species and animal affected. Mycotoxin producing fungi thrive better in warm humid conditions. The feed ingredients might be contaminated with fungi in the field prior harvesting and during storage particularly if grains or seeds contain high moisture content in high humid conditions. Management of mycotoxin should start from the field by controlling growth of fungi in the field, harvesting well dried ingredients, proper drying of ingredients prior storage, avoiding storage of feed and feed ingredients in high humid stores. However, the most practical control of mycotoxin is regular testing for mycotoxin in lab, prior feed compounding or use of different mycotoxin binders.

Reply
May 21, 2021
Dear John, Thank you for your comment I just want to add that its all about intrinsic and extrinsic factor that leads to mold growth and mycotoxin production which are really challenging task to manage at field level but yes there is primary need to develop awareness in the farmers about harvesting and storage practices that will really help to minimize the contamination particularly in developing countries. Further its also important to develop an eco-friendly mycotoxin management strategies concern to food safety. Now a days researchers are looking towards to use probiotics as a food additive which having wide applications such as inhibits the molds and pathogenic bacterial growth, detoxifying mycotoxins (binding/transformation) and having many health benefits to the consumers.
Reply
July 21, 2019

Mycotoxins are metabolized in the alimentary canal, liver or kidneys of the poultry in accordance with their chemical properties. Their transfer to poultry meat and eggs leads to undesirable health effects in humans, leading to major concerns in public health. Contamination of the feeds with fungi both damages their organoleptic properties and increases poisoning risk by decreasing their nutritional value. Toxicity of the mycotoxins depends on the amount of absorption, number of the metabolites that are formed, exposure period and sensitivity of the animal.

Reply
Todd Applegate Todd Applegate
Professor- Head of Department of Poultry Science
July 23, 2019
While I am general agreement with the current comments, a friendly reminder that mycotoxins can not be generalized. For example, binding efficacy of aflatoxin is rather high, but with DON and Fumonisin extremely low. Additionally, DON and FUM are both "field" mycotoxins (occurrence in the crop prior to harvest) vs that of aflatoxin and T2 which can largely occur during storage. Incidence rates and predominant occurrence varies throughout the world, with recurring issues in the US mainly with DON and FUM.
Reply
Jonathan Tarus Jonathan Tarus
Student
July 24, 2019

I also agree with most of the comments concerning mycotoxins in poultry production. Preventive measures should be a foremost step especially in commonly used feed ingredients known to be major sources of contamination. Farmers should be educated on matters concerning mycotoxin contamination at farm level; introduce hands-on analysis methods close to the farming communities so as to encourage farmers to invest in the analysis. This is largely because mycotoxins have been shown to be tasteless, colorless & odorless; these properties might challenge farmers(especially in developing nations) in conceptualizing the existence of these fungal metabolites. I'm confident that if this is done, contamination and losses can be minimized at farm level. Processors to come in second.

Reply
March 6, 2020

Completely agree with you as in day to day production we have to take care of multiple toxins entirely different from what we do in laboratory.
The synergistic action between toxins play a major role as much as 2ppb of aflatoxin may cause immunosuppression without much affection seen over in organs or any other system of birds body resulting in lower antibody count in response to routine vaccination and also threats for secondary bacterial infection of if otherwise normal inhabitants of poultry gut for example e. Coli, clostridia, also predisposes for some protozoal disease if intestinal wall get damage by NE.
I think the problem is having gravity higher than what we think.

Reply
January 13, 2021

I agree to all of the above comment, why we use cheap raw material? In livestock and poultry feed all the owner of the mill purchase cheaper raw material, which is the hub of mycotoxin and they do not use toxin binder and yeast such as saccharomyces cerevisiae to protect our herd from toxicity. When raw material is cheaper it's mean that these ingredients are not good stored, so they get moisture and fungus mold develop
and these ingredients than sale in market on low price which is primary hub of mycotoxin.

Reply
January 14, 2021

dr murad ali Dear Dr.Murad, you are absolutely right. But question is in annual harvest. For example, this year in Ukraine was bad wheat and corn harvest. And grain prices jumping up! Of course, it is possible to replace wheat by barley plus beta-glucanase. But barley is always rich of mycotoxins. That's why it is necessary to add mycotoxin binders. And don't forget about direct mycotoxin destructors, like Bacillus subtilis!
Glad to hear from you, my direct mail is marchenkov150@gmail.com

Reply
January 21, 2021

Frontiers in Microbiology 10: 2528, 1-18. https://doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02528.
Aflasafe seems promising preventive intervention to minimize aflatoxins at harvest time. Genetic resources should also be pursued. Insect damage and nutrient loss continue in absence of safe moisture management after harvest. In absence of the above interventions, the binders are attractive approaches to minimize adverse effects of mycotoxins on birds and animals.

Reply
February 11, 2021
Most of the mycotoxin contamination is of field origin, this is valid also for aflatoxin, in the latest ecition of Compendium of corn diseases it was transferrer to field fungi and no discussed in chapter stotage fungi. From maize the higher aflatoxin rate from aflatoxin B1 was more than 2200 pp, fumonisin B1+B2 was 46 mg/kgand DON 27 mg/kg.In wheam the worst data wete between 20 and 30 mg/kg, but there were sporadic news about even higher amounts. Of course, badly stored grain can also have s ignificant source of them. When mycotoxin management means that we can think what to do when we have cought or producer highly contaminated grain, it is late. You cannot avoid toxin binders, in several cases they are 2-3 times overdosed, Antibiotic treatment to avoid epidemics due immunproblems is only party successful, death rate can remain high, weight gain decreseas, costs rocket to sky and farmer make bankrupty.
We know now that in most cultivars and hybrids the toxin contamination is roughly proportional with disease severity, but a considerable part of the varieties and híbrids make toxin overproduction, e.g. 2-3 fold mor than other genotypes at similar infection severitiy. Differences between registered cultivary or hybrids can be tenfold or higher.
This means that the problem is a breeding one, but the toxin regulation besides genetics is influenced also by ecological condition differently than the disease spread, without toxin analyses we cannot say anything.
We developed a screening methofdology for wheat (including other small grains) and maize, where to classify genotypes to risk groups (low, medium-low, medium high and high) we consider severity of artificial inoculation, toxin contamination, natural infection and natural toxin contamination. The artificial inoculation is made by 2-4 parallel isolates. In maize resistance to F. graminearum, F. verticillioides, Aspergillus flavus is tested separately as the resistance to the do not correlalate in maize. In wheat F. graminearum is enough as the resistance to different Fusarium spp. seems to be connected.
As even high resistance level is not immunity, a low infection and toxin level can be developed, but this can be managed with proper fungicides, fungicide technology, agronomy.
When this is a mostly breeding problem, ste cultivars and variety candidates should be screened. From registered cultivars we suggest to withdraw the highly susceptible and the high toxin producing ones. During registration process the susceptible - highly susceptible candidates must be discarded.
With this action we will contribute to balance climate changes that mostly favour warm ot heat liking organisms on one side i fumonisins and aflatoxins, but the catastrpphal conseqeunces or moderate warm amd humid seasons for F. graminearum can also be significantly decreased.
When you would like to have more indóformation, I copy here several doi numbers of recent publications.
doi:10.3390/su12062342
doi:10.3390/plants9080943
doi:10.3390/microorganisms8071036
doi:10.3390/microorganisms8050627
https://doi.org/10.1094/PDIS-06-20-1322-FE
DOI: 10.23880/oajvsr-16000197
DOI: 10.23880/oajvsr-16000197
doi:10.3390/toxins10090372
DOI 10.1007/s10658-017-1347-x
DOI 10.1007/s10658-017-1350-2
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/as.2015.69094
Yours sincerely
Akos Mesterhazy





Reply
Engormix reserves the right to delete and/or modify comments. See more details
Post a comment
Products
Krave® AP Developed specifically for adult pigs to stimulate appetite ...
Rhodimet®  Methionine is an essential amino acid and a basic stru...
Rovabio® Excel It is a feed additive containing a combination of 19 ac...