4.7 Article

Evaluation of a Yeast Hydrolysate from a Novel Strain of Saccharomyces cerevisiae for Mycotoxin Mitigation using In Vitro and In Vivo Models

Journal

TOXINS
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins14010007

Keywords

deoxynivalenol; mycotoxins; swine; toxicokinetic model; yeast hydrolysate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the efficacy of three selected yeast products as mycotoxin binders. The results showed that only one product was effective in adsorbing one type of mycotoxin. In addition, the product had minimal effect on the absorption of the other two mycotoxins in the animal model.
Mycotoxicoses in animals are caused by exposure to mycotoxin-contaminated feeds. Disease risk is managed using dietary adsorbing agents which reduce oral bioavailability. The objective of this work was to evaluate the efficacy of three selected yeast products as mycotoxin binders using in vitro and in vivo models. Their capacity to adsorb deoxynivalenol (DON), zearalenone (ZEA), and ochratoxin A (OTA) was evaluated using an in vitro model designed to simulate the pH conditions during gastric passage in a monogastric animal. Results showed that only one product, an enzymatic yeast hydrolysate (YHY) of a novel strain Saccharomyces cerevisiae, adsorbed about 45% of DON in solution. Next, we determined the effect of YHY on oral absorption of a DON, ZEA, and OTA mixture using a toxicokinetic model in swine. Toxicokinetic modeling of the plasma concentration-time profiles of DON, OTA, and zearalenone-glucuronide (ZEA-GlcA) showed that YHY tended to reduce the maximal plasma concentration of OTA by 17%. YHY did not reduce oral bioavailability of OTA, DON, and ZEA-GlcA. Within the context of this experiment, and despite some positive indications from both the in vitro and in vivo models employed, we conclude that the YHY prototype was not an effective agent for multiple mycotoxin adsorption.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available