Food Safety Aspects of Breeding Maize to Multi-Resistance Against the Major , , ) and Minor Toxigenic Fungi ( Spp.) As Well As to Toxin Accumulation, Trends, and Solutions-A Review

Maize is the crop which is most commonly exposed to toxigenic fungi that produce many toxins that are harmful to humans and animals alike. Preharvest grain yield loss, preharvest toxin contamination (at harvest), and storage loss are estimated to be between 220 and 265 million metric tons. In the past ten years, the preharvest mycotoxin damage was stable or increased mainly in aflatoxin and fumonisins. The presence of multiple toxins is characteristic. The few breeding programs concentrate on one of the three main toxigenic fungi. About 90% of the experiments except AFB1 rarely test toxin contamination. As disease resistance and resistance to toxin contamination often differ in regard to , , and and their toxins, it is not possible to make a food safety evaluation according to symptom severity alone. The inheritance of the resistance is polygenic, often mixed with epistatic and additive effects, but only a minor part of their phenotypic variation can be explained. All tests are made by a single inoculum (pure isolate or mixture). Genotype ranking differs between isolates and according to aggressiveness level; therefore, the reliability of such resistance data is often problematic. Silk channel inoculation often causes lower ear rot severity than we find in kernel resistance tests. These explain the slow progress and raise skepticism towards resistance breeding. On the other hand, during genetic research, several effective putative resistance genes were identified, and some overlapped with known QTLs. QTLs were identified as securing specific or general resistance to different toxicogenic species. Hybrids were identified with good disease and toxin resistance to the three toxigenic species. Resistance and toxin differences were often tenfold or higher, allowing for the introduction of the resistance and resistance to toxin accumulation tests in the variety testing and the evaluation of the food safety risks of the hybrids within 2-3 years. Beyond this, resistance breeding programs and genetic investigations (QTL-analyses, GWAM tests, etc.) can be improved. All other research may use it with success, where artificial inoculation is necessary. The multi-toxin data reveal more toxins than we can treat now. Their control is not solved. As limits for nonregulated toxins can be introduced, or the existing regulations can be made to be stricter, the research should start. We should mention that a higher resistance to and can be very useful to balance the detrimental effect of hotter and dryer seasons on aflatoxin and fumonisin contamination. This is a new aspect to secure food and feed safety under otherwise damaging climatic conditions. The more resistant hybrids are to the three main agents, the more likely we are to reduce the toxin losses mentioned by about 50% or higher.