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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kolawole, Oluwatobi, Meneely, Julie, Greer, Brett, Chevallier, Olivier, Jones, David S., Connolly, Lisa, Elliott, Christopher
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