4.1 Article Proceedings Paper

CO-OCCURRENCE OF AFLATOXINS, OCHRATOXIN A, FUMONISINS, AND ZEARALENONE IN CEREALS AND FEED, DETERMINED BY COMPETITIVE DIRECT ENZYME-LINKED IMMUNOSORBENT ASSAY AND THIN-LAYER CHROMATOGRAPHY

出版社

INST MEDICAL RESEARCH & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
DOI: 10.2478/10004-1254-60-2009-1975

关键词

food contamination; mycotoxin synergism; mycotoxins; natural carcinogens

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Fusarium species frequently contaminate crops. For this reason mycotoxins such as aflatoxins (AFs), ochratoxin A (OTA), fumonisins (FBs), and zearalenone (ZEA) are found in food and feed in a wide range of concentrations, depending on environmental and storage conditions. Consumption of mycotoxin-contaminated food and feed has been associated with acute and chronic poisoning and carcinoma. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and co-occurrence of AFs (B-1+B-2+G(1)+G(2)), OTA, FBs (B-1+B-2+B-3), and ZEA in 37 samples of cereals and feed randomly collected in 2007 from households of an endemic nephropathy (EN) area in Croatia. The mycotoxins were determined using the competitive direct ELISA test (CD-ELISA) in combination with thin-layer chromatography (TLC). The most frequent mycotoxin was ZEA (92%, mean 318.3 mu g kg(-1)), followed by FBs (27%, 3690 mu g kg(-1)), AFs (24.3%, 4.6 mu g kg(-1)), and OTA (16.2%, 9.8 mu g kg(-1)). Levels of AFs, ZEA, and FBs detected by CD-ELISA significantly correlated with the TLC results. However, only one OTA-positive sample was confirmed by TLC due to its high limit of detection. The levels of these mycotoxins were below the permissible limit for animal feed. Twenty-nine percent of cereals were contaminated with FBs, OTA, or ZEA in mass fractions above the permissible limit for humans. Co-occurrence of two toxins varied between 4.2% and 54% and of three between 4.2% and 7.6%. Prolonged co-exposure to AFs, OTA, FBs, and ZEA might increase the risk of various chronic diseases.

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

4.1
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