Guilherme Bromfman, NCA Mycotoxin Management Category Manager at Adisseo, underscores the effects of some mycotoxins in the poultry and pig industry and explains how Adisseo can help customers to face mycotoxins challenges, during IPPE 2019
Mycotoxin problem is difficult to manage when multiple mycotoxins are present in feed. Our research should be focussed on multiple mycotoxins in feed. Recently I conducted an experiment in broiler chickens involving ochratoxin A levels in feed. It was found that broiler chickens can tolerate up to 50 ppb of dietary ochratoxin A without any adverse effect on their performance, organ weight and biochemical parameters. Dr. Ram Singh Bibyan.
I agree with you that certain birds can tolerate a different amount of mycotoxins contamination. The root of the problem is to determine levels of mycotoxins in raw materials and then make fine statistical average on the finish feed. That is my opinion while working in the field in over 80 countries and with poultry producers. For example, in Indonesia and other Asian countries higher levels of mycotoxins do not reflect the behavior of growth or animal organs, like in other continents that high number may affect their production. One important field problem is that owners do not like to invest in mycotoxins testing or surveying trucks upon delivering runoff feed. That is crucial to minimize any field problem. Thank you and regards.
Dr. Ram Singh Bibyan thanks for your comments, and I agree with you. Multiple mycotoxins can play an important role on overall effect of a challenge. Also, it is important to remember that health status, age, production phase, and other stress factors can be critical on how a mycotoxin contamination affects an animal.
Jodh singh , I have developed Toxin binders for Mycotoxins only. Now my place of posting has been changed to Central Institute for Research on Buffaloes, Hisar. I have started working on Ruminant Mycotoxicosis. Please feel free to ask any question regarding Mycotoxicosis in Poultry and Ruminants.
Dr. Ram Singh Bibyan
Ajebu Nurfeta , Most of my articles are available in Open access Journals like Livestock Research International, Indian Journal of Animal Sciences, Journal of Poultry Science and Technology. You can download easily.
I agreed with Mr. Raul Felman concerning mycotoxin testing and owners investing. In the Caribbean especially in Trinidad, it's destroying the bird altogether. The mould growth underneath the gizzard sheet is overwhelming. My opinion is more needs to be done with grain production but climate change might be an issue also storage management.
Nizam Ali do you have any field reports of this? I have heard of the same issues here in the states, but unfortunately they aren't commonly documented. Do you have any photos (you mentioned fungi growing under the gizzard sheet?).
Thank you for a good report. Mycotoxin has been recognized as a potential threat to animal health especially in poultry which results in economic losses. This is a challenge for scientists working in a wide range of disciplines. Exploring different ways of reducing the toxins in poultry feeds using various species could be useful to farmers.
Toxins are everywhere in feed raw materials. I think stress aggravate the situation in broiler birds at the time of 21-35 days and causes issues. It is multiple levels of different toxins play their role.
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.
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 firstname.lastname@example.org, welcome.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 email@example.com
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.
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.