4.7 Article

Effects and Underlying Mechanisms of Zearalenone Mycotoxin at Concentrations Close to the EC Recommendation on the Colon of Piglets after Weaning

期刊

AGRICULTURE-BASEL
卷 13, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/agriculture13071372

关键词

zearalenone; piglets; weaning; inflammation; oxidative stress; signaling pathway

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Zearalenone (ZEN), a mycotoxin produced by Fusarium fungi, contaminates food and feed, causing health issues for humans and animals. Pigs, as major consumers of grains, are particularly sensitive to mycotoxins. This study observed the effects of ZEN at concentrations below and above the EU recommendation on oxidative and inflammatory responses in the colon of weaned piglets. Exposure to the lower concentration of ZEN (75 ppb) did not result in changes in stress and inflammation markers or associated signaling pathways.
Zearalenone (ZEN) is a mycotoxin produced by Fusarium fungi that contaminates food and feed, affecting both human and animal health. Among farm animals, the pig is a great consumer of grains and has a native sensitivity to mycotoxins. As the main route of contamination is oral, the intestine is the first defense barrier that plays an important role in the immune response being able to secrete effector molecules (cytokines). At the European level, there are no regulations regarding the amount of ZEN that can be present in the feed of piglets, only recommendations for piglets 0.100 mg ZEN/kg feed (100 ppb). In this study, the effects of ZEN in concentrations below (75 ppb) and above (290 ppb) EU recommendation on the level of some key markers involved in the oxidative and inflammatory response, as well as the mechanisms and signaling pathways through which ZEN could produce its toxicity, were monitored in the colon of weaned piglets. The exposure of the piglets to the lower concentration of ZEN (75 ppb) did not lead to changes in stress and inflammation markers or in the signaling pathways associated with these processes.

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