4.4 Article

Fusarium mycotoxin content of UK organic and conventional barley

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/02652030902919418

关键词

risk assessment - modelling; survey; mycotoxins - Fusarium; mycotoxins - trichothecenes; mycotoxins - zearalenone; cereals

资金

  1. UK Food Standards Agency [CO4033, CO4034]
  2. Home-Grown Cereal Authority [RD-2002-2706]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Each year (2002-2005), approximately 100 samples of barley from fields of known agronomy were analysed for ten trichothecenes by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC/MS) including deoxynivalenol (DON), nivalenol, 3-acetyl DON, 15-acetyl DON, fusarenone X, T-2 toxin (T2), HT-2 toxin (HT2), diacetoxyscirpenol, neosolaniol, and T-2 triol. Samples were also analysed for moniliformin and zearalenone by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Of the ten trichothecenes analysed from 446 harvest samples of barley, only two, diacetoxyscirpenol and neosolaniol, were not detected. The concentrations of type A trichothecenes were similar to those that occurred in wheat over the same period, whilst those of type B trichothecenes were markedly lower. Deoxynivalenol was the most frequently detected Fusarium mycotoxin, present above the limit of quantification (10 mu g kg(-1)) in 57% of samples, and was usually present at the highest concentration. A single sample (0.2%) exceeded the legal limit for DON in unprocessed barley over the 4-year period. Moniliformin and zearalenone were both rarely detected (2% of samples greater than 10 mu g kg(-1) for both toxins) with maximum concentrations of 45 and 44 mu g kg(-1), respectively. Year and region had a significant effect on DON and HT2+T2, but there was no significant difference in the concentration of these mycotoxins between organic and conventional samples. Overall, the risk of UK barley exceeding the newly introduced legal limits for Fusarium mycotoxins in cereals intended for human consumption is very low, but the percentage of samples above these limits will fluctuate between years.

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

4.4
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