» Articles » PMID: 31726774

Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims

Overview
Journal Toxins (Basel)
Publisher MDPI
Specialty Toxicology
Date 2019 Nov 16
PMID 31726774
Citations 22
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Contamination of animal feed with multiple mycotoxins is an ongoing and growing issue, as over 60% of cereal crops worldwide have been shown to be contaminated with mycotoxins. The present study was carried out to assess the efficacy of commercial feed additives sold with multi-mycotoxin binding claims. Ten feed additives were obtained and categorised into three groups based on their main composition. Their capacity to simultaneously adsorb deoxynivalenol (DON), zearalenone (ZEN), fumonisin B1 (FB1), ochratoxin A (OTA), aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) and T-2 toxin was assessed and compared using an in vitro model designed to simulate the gastrointestinal tract of a monogastric animal. Results showed that only one product (a modified yeast cell wall) effectively adsorbed more than 50% of DON, ZEN, FB1, OTA, T-2 and AFB1, in the following order: AFB1 > ZEN > T-2 > DON > OTA > FB1. The remaining products were able to moderately bind AFB1 (44-58%) but had less, or in some cases, no effect on ZEN, FB1, OTA and T-2 binding (<35%). It is important for companies producing mycotoxin binders that their products undergo rigorous trials under the conditions which best mimic the environment that they must be active in. Claims on the binding efficiency should only be made when such data has been generated.

Citing Articles

Advancements in enzymatic reaction-mediated microbial transformation.

Zheng C, Gao L, Sun H, Zhao X, Gao Z, Liu J Heliyon. 2024; 10(19):e38187.

PMID: 39430465 PMC: 11489147. DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e38187.


The efficiency of mycotoxin binding by sorbents in the model using a naturally contaminated animal feed.

Zybura A, Jedziniak P J Vet Res. 2024; 68(2):233-240.

PMID: 38947151 PMC: 11210358. DOI: 10.2478/jvetres-2024-0023.


Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Yeast Cell Wall Extract Supple-Mentation during Mycotoxin Challenges on the Performance of Laying Hens.

Weaver A, Weaver D, Adams N, Yiannikouris A Toxins (Basel). 2024; 16(4).

PMID: 38668596 PMC: 11054775. DOI: 10.3390/toxins16040171.


Hidden Hazards Revealed: Mycotoxins and Their Masked Forms in Poultry.

Okasha H, Song B, Song Z Toxins (Basel). 2024; 16(3).

PMID: 38535803 PMC: 10976275. DOI: 10.3390/toxins16030137.


In Vitro Evaluation of the Adsorption Efficacy of Biochar Materials on Aflatoxin B, Ochratoxin A, and Zearalenone.

Appell M, Wegener E, Sharma B, Eller F, Evans K, Compton D Animals (Basel). 2023; 13(21).

PMID: 37958067 PMC: 10649945. DOI: 10.3390/ani13213311.


References
1.
Sobrova P, Adam V, Vasatkova A, Beklova M, Zeman L, Kizek R . Deoxynivalenol and its toxicity. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2011; 3(3):94-9. PMC: 2984136. DOI: 10.2478/v10102-010-0019-x. View

2.
Streit E, Schatzmayr G, Tassis P, Tzika E, Marin D, Taranu I . Current situation of mycotoxin contamination and co-occurrence in animal feed--focus on Europe. Toxins (Basel). 2012; 4(10):788-809. PMC: 3496989. DOI: 10.3390/toxins4100788. View

3.
Frizzell C, Ndossi D, Verhaegen S, Dahl E, Eriksen G, Sorlie M . Endocrine disrupting effects of zearalenone, alpha- and beta-zearalenol at the level of nuclear receptor binding and steroidogenesis. Toxicol Lett. 2011; 206(2):210-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2011.07.015. View

4.
Lyagin I, Efremenko E . Enzymes for Detoxification of Various Mycotoxins: Origins and Mechanisms of Catalytic Action. Molecules. 2019; 24(13). PMC: 6651818. DOI: 10.3390/molecules24132362. View

5.
Ayo E, Matemu A, Laswai G, Kimanya M . An In Vitro Evaluation of the Capacity of Local Tanzanian Crude Clay and Ash-Based Materials in Binding Aflatoxins in Solution. Toxins (Basel). 2018; 10(12). PMC: 6316085. DOI: 10.3390/toxins10120510. View