Cargando…
Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims
Contamination of animal feed with multiple mycotoxins is an ongoing and growing issue, as over 60% of cereal crops worldwide have been shown to be contaminated with mycotoxins. The present study was carried out to assess the efficacy of commercial feed additives sold with multi-mycotoxin binding cla...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6891808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31726774 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/toxins11110659 |
_version_ | 1783475903241650176 |
---|---|
author | Kolawole, Oluwatobi Meneely, Julie Greer, Brett Chevallier, Olivier Jones, David S. Connolly, Lisa Elliott, Christopher |
author_facet | Kolawole, Oluwatobi Meneely, Julie Greer, Brett Chevallier, Olivier Jones, David S. Connolly, Lisa Elliott, Christopher |
author_sort | Kolawole, Oluwatobi |
collection | PubMed |
description | Contamination of animal feed with multiple mycotoxins is an ongoing and growing issue, as over 60% of cereal crops worldwide have been shown to be contaminated with mycotoxins. The present study was carried out to assess the efficacy of commercial feed additives sold with multi-mycotoxin binding claims. Ten feed additives were obtained and categorised into three groups based on their main composition. Their capacity to simultaneously adsorb deoxynivalenol (DON), zearalenone (ZEN), fumonisin B1 (FB1), ochratoxin A (OTA), aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) and T-2 toxin was assessed and compared using an in vitro model designed to simulate the gastrointestinal tract of a monogastric animal. Results showed that only one product (a modified yeast cell wall) effectively adsorbed more than 50% of DON, ZEN, FB1, OTA, T-2 and AFB1, in the following order: AFB1 > ZEN > T-2 > DON > OTA > FB1. The remaining products were able to moderately bind AFB1 (44–58%) but had less, or in some cases, no effect on ZEN, FB1, OTA and T-2 binding (<35%). It is important for companies producing mycotoxin binders that their products undergo rigorous trials under the conditions which best mimic the environment that they must be active in. Claims on the binding efficiency should only be made when such data has been generated. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6891808 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68918082019-12-23 Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims Kolawole, Oluwatobi Meneely, Julie Greer, Brett Chevallier, Olivier Jones, David S. Connolly, Lisa Elliott, Christopher Toxins (Basel) Article Contamination of animal feed with multiple mycotoxins is an ongoing and growing issue, as over 60% of cereal crops worldwide have been shown to be contaminated with mycotoxins. The present study was carried out to assess the efficacy of commercial feed additives sold with multi-mycotoxin binding claims. Ten feed additives were obtained and categorised into three groups based on their main composition. Their capacity to simultaneously adsorb deoxynivalenol (DON), zearalenone (ZEN), fumonisin B1 (FB1), ochratoxin A (OTA), aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) and T-2 toxin was assessed and compared using an in vitro model designed to simulate the gastrointestinal tract of a monogastric animal. Results showed that only one product (a modified yeast cell wall) effectively adsorbed more than 50% of DON, ZEN, FB1, OTA, T-2 and AFB1, in the following order: AFB1 > ZEN > T-2 > DON > OTA > FB1. The remaining products were able to moderately bind AFB1 (44–58%) but had less, or in some cases, no effect on ZEN, FB1, OTA and T-2 binding (<35%). It is important for companies producing mycotoxin binders that their products undergo rigorous trials under the conditions which best mimic the environment that they must be active in. Claims on the binding efficiency should only be made when such data has been generated. MDPI 2019-11-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6891808/ /pubmed/31726774 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/toxins11110659 Text en © 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Kolawole, Oluwatobi Meneely, Julie Greer, Brett Chevallier, Olivier Jones, David S. Connolly, Lisa Elliott, Christopher Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title | Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title_full | Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title_fullStr | Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title_short | Comparative In Vitro Assessment of a Range of Commercial Feed Additives with Multiple Mycotoxin Binding Claims |
title_sort | comparative in vitro assessment of a range of commercial feed additives with multiple mycotoxin binding claims |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6891808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31726774 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/toxins11110659 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kolawoleoluwatobi comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT meneelyjulie comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT greerbrett comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT chevallierolivier comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT jonesdavids comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT connollylisa comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims AT elliottchristopher comparativeinvitroassessmentofarangeofcommercialfeedadditiveswithmultiplemycotoxinbindingclaims |