4.7 Article

Evaluation of the toxicity and chemical alterations of deoxynivalenol degradation products under ozone treatment

期刊

FOOD CONTROL
卷 124, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.107937

关键词

Deoxynivalenol; Ozone; Cytotoxicity; Metabolomics; Structure

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFC1604206]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China - Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [31801660, 31772069, 1022050205205500]
  3. national first-class discipline program of Food Science and Technology [JUFSTR20180303]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that ozone can effectively oxidize and degrade deoxynivalenol (DON) in saturated aqueous ozone, with a degradation rate of up to 70%. Toxicity analysis showed that the degradation products impacted the viability of A549 cells, but only a small portion of the identified degradation products resulted in reduced toxicity.
Here, we studied the ozonolysis of deoxynivalenol (DON) in saturated aqueous ozone. We found that ozone can play an important role in the oxidation and degradation of DON. The reaction reached its peak within 5 min of treatment, and the degradation rate was approximately 70%. Toxicity analysis (CCK-8 analysis, ROS analysis, and apoptosis analysis) revealed that DON and saturated aqueous ozone treatments did not significantly change the toxicity of degradation products, and both could induce a decrease in the viability of A549 cells. The results of the metabolomics and cytotoxicity analysis were consistent. We used the Q Exactive Focus high-resolution liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry system to identify degradation products. Among the four identified degradation products, only the epoxy groups at the C-12, C-13 positions of C15H20O9 were opened. Because the epoxy groups at the C-12, C-13 positions in most degradation products were not opened based on the toxicity mechanism of DON, the toxicity of DON was not significantly reduced.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据