4.7 Article

Mycotoxins in Tea ((Camellia sinensis (L.) Kuntze)): Contamination and Dietary Exposure Profiling in the Chinese Population

Journal

TOXINS
Volume 14, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/toxins14070452

Keywords

mycotoxins; tea; dietary exposure; risk assessment

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC1604403]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study assessed mycotoxin contamination in Chinese tea samples and determined the relationship between tea consumption and dietary exposure. The results showed that the concentrations of most mycotoxins in tea samples were below the established regulations, except for ochratoxin A in dark tea samples. Risk assessment indicated that there is no dietary risk of exposure to mycotoxins through tea consumption in the Chinese population.
Tea is popular worldwide with multiple health benefits. It may be contaminated by the accidental introduction of toxigenic fungi during production and storage. The present study focuses on potential mycotoxin contamination in tea and the probable dietary exposure assessments associated with consumption. The contamination levels for 16 mycotoxins in 352 Chinese tea samples were determined by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Average concentrations of almost all mycotoxins in tea samples were below the established regulations, except for ochratoxin A in the dark tea samples. A risk assessment was performed for the worst-case scenarios by point evaluation and Monte Carlo assessment model using the obtained mycotoxin levels and the available green, oolong, black, and dark tea consumption data from cities in China. Additionally, we discuss dietary risk through tea consumption as beverages and dietary supplements. In conclusion, there is no dietary risk of exposure to mycotoxins through tea consumption in the Chinese population.

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