Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Aflatoxin

Aflatoxins are polyketide-derived mycotoxins produced by toxigenic strains of Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus that contaminate agricultural commodities including maize, peanuts, tree nuts, and oilseeds under conditions of high temperature and humidity. These compounds, particularly aflatoxin B1, exert acute hepatotoxicity at high doses, leading to symptoms such as vomiting, abdominal pain, and potentially fatal liver failure in cases of aflatoxicosis outbreaks. Chronic low-level exposure to aflatoxins causes immunosuppression, stunted growth in children, and increased risk of hepatocellular carcinoma, with aflatoxin B1 classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a Group 1 human carcinogen due to its bioactivation into DNA-adducting epoxides that induce mutations, especially synergistic with hepatitis B virus infection. Empirical data from epidemiological studies link dietary aflatoxin intake to elevated liver cancer incidence in high-exposure regions of sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia. Aflatoxins also bioaccumulate in animal products like milk (as aflatoxin M1) when livestock consume contaminated feed, amplifying human exposure risks. As unavoidable contaminants in global food chains, aflatoxins inflict billions in annual economic losses through crop rejection, feed disposal, and health burdens, prompting regulatory limits (e.g., 4 ppb in U.S. human food) and interventions like biocontrol with non-toxigenic A. flavus strains to reduce field contamination. Despite advances in detection via HPLC and management practices, challenges persist in developing countries due to climatic factors favoring fungal growth and limited post-harvest storage infrastructure.

History and Discovery

The Turkey X Disease Outbreak (1960)

In 1960, an outbreak of an unidentified disease struck turkey farms in southern and eastern , resulting in the deaths of more than 100,000 young turkey poults. The condition, initially termed "Turkey X disease" due to its unknown , presented with acute symptoms including hemorrhages, , liver , and rapid mortality often within days of onset. Affected birds appeared healthy until exhibiting sudden weakness, leading to high mortality rates in flocks fed certain batches of . Epidemiological investigations quickly identified a common dietary factor: () meal imported from , incorporated into the protein-rich feed for the poults. Farms unaffected by the outbreak had not used this specific meal, while experimental feeding of the implicated meal to day-old ducklings and other reproduced the identical , confirming a toxic rather than infectious cause. The toxin's stability to heating ruled out bacterial contamination as the primary agent, shifting focus to a chemical contaminant in the moldy meal. This event, which also impacted ducklings and pheasants on affected farms, prompted urgent toxicological studies and highlighted vulnerabilities in imported feed supplies, marking the empirical onset of aflatoxin research without prior assumptions of microbial origins. The outbreak's scale—spanning multiple regions and species—underscored the potency of the unseen , later traced to fungal metabolites in the meal.

Isolation, Identification, and Early Research

Following the Turkey X disease outbreak, British researchers at the Ministry of Agriculture's Central Veterinary Laboratory initiated fractionation of toxic Brazilian peanut meal to isolate the causative agent. In late , initial extracts demonstrated toxicity in day-old ducklings and chicks, with symptoms including liver hemorrhage and necrosis mirroring field cases. By mid-1961, K. Sargeant and colleagues purified a blue-fluorescing compound from extracts of the meal, confirmed as hepatotoxic via dose-response bioassays in rats and , establishing a direct causal link through controlled that reproduced acute hepatic lesions at doses as low as 0.3 mg/kg body weight. Parallel culturing of , isolated from contaminated peanuts, yielded similar fluorescent s when grown on autoclaved peanuts, providing first-principles evidence of fungal etiology through comparative toxicity testing of culture filtrates against sterile controls. The primary was designated aflatoxin, derived from "A. flavus ," with variants B1 (major hepatotoxic form) and G1 identified via (TLC) separation on plates, where characteristic blue and greenish under UV light distinguished them from non-toxic fractions. Animal trials quantified potency, revealing LD50 values of approximately 10 mg/kg in ducklings versus higher thresholds in , underscoring species-specific deduced from histopathological examination of exposed livers showing centrilobular and bile duct . In the United States, concurrent research by USDA and university teams extended findings to cottonseed meal, a common poultry feed ingredient. By , feeding experiments with A. flavus-inoculated cottonseed replicated turkey X symptoms in chicks, confirming aflatoxin contamination via TLC detection and extraction yields of up to 1-2 ppm in naturally molded samples. These bioassays, including dose-escalation studies in trout and rats, further validated causality by correlating toxin levels with mortality rates and liver enzyme elevations, isolating aflatoxin as the key factor independent of other meal components. Early spectroscopic analysis, including UV absorption at 362 nm, corroborated purity and structure hypotheses, paving the way for synthesis efforts.

Chemistry and Biosynthesis

Chemical Structures and Major Variants


Aflatoxins constitute a group of structurally related mycotoxins characterized as difurocoumarin derivatives, featuring a nucleus fused to a bisfuran ring system. This core scaffold includes a pentanone ring in the B-series and a six-membered in the G-series, with the terminal moiety in variants like AFB1 contributing to their reactivity.
The principal naturally occurring aflatoxins are AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, and AFG2, distinguished by saturation and ring substitutions: AFB1 and AFG1 possess a in the terminal , rendering them more reactive than the saturated AFB2 and AFG2. AFB1, with molecular formula C17H12O6, predominates in contamination and exhibits the highest potency among these, followed by AFG1, due to structural features enabling formation. Aflatoxin M1 (AFM1), a hydroxylated of AFB1 at the 4-position (C17H14O7), arises post-ingestion in mammals and persists in products. Under light, B-series aflatoxins (AFB1, AFB2) fluoresce at approximately 425 , while G-series (AFG1, AFG2) emit at 540 , a property exploited in detection methods and stemming from their conjugated ring systems. Relative toxicities align with structural integrity: AFB1 > AFG1 > AFB2 > AFG2, with potency reductions in metabolites like AFM1 at about 10-50% of AFB1 due to altering electrophilicity. Aflatoxins demonstrate thermal stability up to 150-160°C, resisting degradation during standard like or cooking, though complete breakdown occurs above 268°C or via strong oxidants, bases, or treatments that disrupt the difurocoumarin core. This resilience facilitates their persistence through food chains, from contaminated feed to animal-derived products.

Producing Fungi and Biosynthetic Pathways

Aflatoxins are primarily produced by certain strains of the filamentous fungi and , both belonging to Aspergillus section Flavi. A. flavus typically synthesizes aflatoxins B1 and B2, while A. parasiticus produces B1, B2, G1, and G2, reflecting differences in their biosynthetic gene clusters. Strain variability is pronounced, with atoxigenic variants naturally occurring that lack functional aflatoxin production due to deletions or mutations in key pathway genes; for instance, studies of diverse A. flavus isolates show that only a subset are toxigenic, with atoxigenic strains comprising up to 40-50% in some populations. Closely related species like , domesticated for food (e.g., in and production), are non-aflatoxigenic, often due to genomic deletions in the aflatoxin cluster or regulatory elements that prevent toxin synthesis under industrial conditions. The aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway is a complex process involving over 20 clustered genes on the fungal , initiating with the iterative condensation of units by enzymes to form the intermediate norsolorinic acid (NOR). From NOR, subsequent enzymatic steps—including oxidations, cyclizations, and decarboxylations mediated by genes like aflD (for NOR synthesis) and aflM (for early pathway intermediates)—lead to the difurocoumarin structure of aflatoxins. The pathway is tightly regulated by the AflR, a Zn(II)2Cys6 binuclear cluster protein that binds upstream of cluster genes to activate expression, with additional modulation by AflS for cluster-specific control. Environmental cues such as , temperature fluctuations (optimal around 25-30°C), and nutrient limitation (e.g., carbon ) trigger pathway activation via signaling cascades that upregulate AflR and associated stress-response genes, enhancing flux toward production as a potential survival mechanism. Empirical transcriptomic data from A. flavus exposed to drought-mimicking conditions reveal upregulated expression of biosynthetic genes like aflP and aflQ under low (a_w ~0.85), correlating with elevated aflatoxin yields. In atoxigenic strains, these cues fail to induce production due to inherent genetic defects, highlighting the pathway's plasticity and evolutionary divergence within section Flavi.

Occurrence and Contamination Factors

Primary Sources in Crops, Foods, and Feed

Aflatoxins primarily contaminate staple crops grown in tropical and subtropical regions, with serving as a major hotspot due to its widespread cultivation and susceptibility. In , mean levels in frequently exceed regulatory limits, reaching 128 µg/kg in , 517 µg/kg in , and 659 µg/kg in based on field surveys of locally grown crops. Extreme contamination events in East African have recorded levels up to 48,000 µg/kg, highlighting the prevalence in post-harvest storage under local conditions. Peanuts represent another critical commodity, with global risk assessments identifying them as highly prone to aflatoxin accumulation during growth and , contributing significantly to dietary exposure in producing regions. Tree nuts, including pistachios and almonds, show variable but notable contamination, with pistachios exhibiting higher susceptibility; mean total aflatoxin concentrations across nut samples globally average 31-38 µg/kg in peanuts and pistachios. Spices such as chili peppers, , and are also empirically verified vectors, often contaminated during drying and in humid climates, though specific prevalence data underscore their role in amplifying total dietary intake rather than isolated hotspots. In animal-derived foods, aflatoxin M1 appears in through metabolic carryover from contaminated feed consumed by , with global surveys linking elevated milk residues to feed sources exceeding 20 ppb aflatoxin B1. Livestock feeds exacerbate this cycle, as corn , , and meal frequently test positive, with 234 of 550 analyzed feed samples showing aflatoxins and high levels specifically in these ingredients serving as direct vectors to animals. meal, in particular, poses risks during processing and storage, potentially transferring residues to , , and eggs when incorporated into rations. Worldwide feed monitoring from 2016-2017 reported a 23% incidence of aflatoxins across 14,400 samples, underscoring the broad implications for animal products.

Environmental and Agricultural Conditions Favoring Production

Aflatoxin production by and A. parasiticus is favored by temperatures between 25°C and 35°C, with peak toxin synthesis often occurring around 30°C under aerobic conditions. High relative humidity exceeding 85% or (a_w) above 0.85 in substrates enables optimal fungal sporulation and mycelial growth, as lower moisture levels inhibit aflatoxin biosynthesis despite permitting some fungal proliferation. These conditions align with the physiological requirements of the fungi, where enzymatic pathways for synthesis—precursors to aflatoxins—thrive in warm, moist microenvironments within kernels or soils. In agricultural settings, drought stress during crop maturation, particularly in grains like and , exacerbates contamination by compromising plant epidermal integrity and defense responses, thereby facilitating fungal colonization and toxin accumulation under water-limited regimes. Heat accompanying drought further amplifies this vulnerability, as maturing crops under combined exhibit elevated kernel temperatures that mimic the fungi's optima, leading to pre-harvest invasion during kernel fill stages. Studies on U.S. southern crops confirm that such stress induces physiological shifts, including reduced production, which indirectly promote aflatoxin genesis without altering fungal directly. Insect damage and soil characteristics serve as critical entry vectors; mechanical wounds from earworms or borers in expose to airborne s, correlating with up to several-fold increases in contamination levels, as documented in field trials where late-season injury under predicted outbreaks via geospatial models. Light-textured, drought-prone soils in regions like the U.S. enhance fungal proliferation by retaining heat and permitting rapid moisture fluctuations that stress roots and promote upward migration into developing ears. These factors causally link agronomic vulnerabilities to heightened risk, independent of post-harvest handling. Projections under scenarios indicate expanded aflatoxin-prone zones due to rising temperatures and erratic ; in , models forecast northward shifts in suitable conditions, with southern regions like and already experiencing elevated risks that may extend to central areas by mid-century under +2°C warming. The European Environment Agency's 2025 assessment highlights how warmer, drier summers will intensify pressures, including aflatoxins, across continental crops, urging recalibration of risk maps based on observed fungal range expansions. In the U.S., similar modeling for predicts heightened contamination probabilities in traditional belts by 2031–2040, driven by prolonged favoring A. flavus .

Toxicological Mechanisms

Acute Toxicity Pathways

Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), the most toxic aflatoxin variant, is bioactivated in the liver primarily through cytochrome P450 mixed-function oxidases (such as CYP1A2 and CYP3A4 in mammals) to yield the highly electrophilic AFB1-8,9-exo-epoxide. This reactive metabolite spontaneously binds to nucleophilic centers in cellular macromolecules, including the N7-guanine of DNA and RNA, as well as sulfhydryl groups in proteins, thereby alkylating and impairing their function, which triggers immediate cytotoxic cascades leading to apoptosis and necrosis. The liver's centrality in this pathway stems from its enrichment in phase I metabolizing enzymes, concentrating the formation and subsequent macromolecular adduction locally. Empirical studies in demonstrate rapid onset of post-exposure, with histological evidence of centrilobular necrosis, fatty degeneration, and proliferation emerging within hours to days, alongside systemic effects like from impaired protein synthesis. Acute dose-response profiles vary by species but indicate high potency, with median lethal doses (LD50) typically ranging from 0.5 to 10 mg/kg body weight; for instance, day-old ducklings exhibit LD50 values as low as 0.3-0.4 mg/kg, while rats show around 5-7 mg/kg orally. species display heightened sensitivity relative to mammals, attributable to efficient CYP-mediated activation coupled with deficient phase II detoxification (e.g., limited S-transferase conjugation of the ). Pathological hallmarks include hepatic hemorrhage and , driven by disruption and inflammatory mediator release from damaged hepatocytes. No safe threshold for has been established across sensitive species, as sub-lethal exposures can still evoke dose-dependent without a verifiable no-observed-effect level, underscoring the absence of a protective margin in high-bioactivation contexts.

Chronic Effects and Carcinogenic Processes

Chronic exposure to low doses of aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), the most potent aflatoxin variant, induces genotoxic effects through metabolic activation by cytochrome P450 enzymes to form the reactive 8,9-epoxide intermediate, which covalently binds to DNA, primarily at the N7 position of guanine, creating stable adducts that lead to depurination and mutagenesis. These adducts preferentially cause G to T transversions, notably at codon 249 of the p53 tumor suppressor gene, disrupting its function and initiating hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) via a multi-hit carcinogenic process involving initiation, promotion, and progression over extended periods of repeated low-level exposure. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies AFB1 and naturally occurring mixtures of aflatoxins as Group 1 carcinogens, confirming their causal role in human hepatocarcinogenesis based on sufficient evidence from mechanistic and animal studies demonstrating dose-dependent tumor formation. In animal models, AFB1's carcinogenic potency is exceptionally high; for instance, rainbow trout exhibit extreme sensitivity, with AFB1 inducing hepatocarcinogenesis at doses far lower than those required for other agents, underscoring its efficacy as a genotoxic initiator in comparative dosimetry studies. Longitudinal rodent studies reveal that chronic dietary AFB1 administration (e.g., 1–25 ppb over months) promotes preneoplastic lesions and HCC through cumulative DNA damage and oxidative stress, independent of acute cytotoxicity, aligning with a threshold-like multi-hit model where repair capacity is overwhelmed by persistent adduct formation. Beyond carcinogenesis, chronic AFB1 exposure elicits immunosuppression by impairing both humoral and cell-mediated immunity; in avian and mammalian models, subchronic dosing reduces antibody titers to antigens like sheep erythrocytes by 30–50% and diminishes T-lymphocyte proliferation, as measured in vitro, thereby increasing susceptibility to secondary infections. Concurrently, growth stunting manifests as dose-dependent reductions in body weight gain (e.g., 20–40% deficits in young rats fed 0.5–1 mg/kg AFB1 over 4–8 weeks), attributable to disrupted protein synthesis, micronutrient absorption, and endocrine signaling rather than overt malnutrition alone, per controlled feeding trials. These effects compound over time, with histopathological evidence of hepatic fibrosis and altered organ weights supporting causal links to sustained bioactivation and systemic toxicity.

Health Impacts in Animals and Humans

Effects in Livestock and Poultry

Poultry species, particularly turkey poults and ducklings, exhibit high susceptibility to aflatoxins, with acute aflatoxicosis manifesting as anorexia, depression, hemorrhage, jaundice, and ascites, often leading to elevated mortality rates at dietary levels exceeding 1 mg/kg. Chronic exposure in chickens and turkeys results in reduced body weight gain, impaired feed efficiency, decreased egg production and quality, and immunosuppression, increasing vulnerability to secondary infections. Pigs, especially pre-weaning individuals, are similarly sensitive, displaying hepatotoxicity, poor growth, and reduced feed intake, with outbreaks linked to contaminated feeds causing sporadic deaths. In contrast, ruminants such as and sheep demonstrate greater resistance due to rumen microbial degradation of aflatoxins, which limits systemic absorption and toxicity, though young or stressed animals remain at for subclinical effects like reduced . and metabolize aflatoxins less efficiently, leading to and heightened pathological responses compared to adult ruminants. Aflatoxin B1 residues carry over into animal products, with dairy cattle converting ingested AFB1 to the metabolite aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) excreted in milk at transfer rates of 1-2%, potentially rising to 6% in high-yielding cows, necessitating monitoring to avoid regulatory violations. Poultry meat and eggs, as well as pork, can contain detectable aflatoxin residues from chronic exposure, contributing to product condemnations during farm outbreaks. These effects translate to significant economic losses in operations, including diminished growth performance, lower carcass yields, and feed wastage, with producers facing sub-lethal costs from impaired conversion efficiency and reduced market weights. Outbreak records document condemnations of contaminated feeds and affected , exacerbating losses in regions with recurrent .

Human Aflatoxicosis Cases and Epidemiology

Acute aflatoxicosis outbreaks in humans are rare but can be severe, typically resulting from consumption of highly contaminated staple foods like . In during January to June 2004, an outbreak in eastern regions led to 317 confirmed cases and 125 s, with a of 39%, primarily due to ingestion of homegrown contaminated with aflatoxin levels exceeding 8,000 μg/kg. Symptoms included acute , abdominal , , and rapid progression to hepatic failure and within days. Similar acute incidents have been documented elsewhere, such as in in 1974 with over 100 cases of hepatitis-like illness from contaminated , though fewer fatalities. Chronic exposure to aflatoxins, primarily through dietary staples in developing regions, contributes significantly to (HCC) incidence. A and of epidemiological studies estimated the attributable risk (PAR) of aflatoxin-related HCC at 17% (95% CI: 14-19%) globally, rising to 21% in (HBV)-endemic areas with high aflatoxin levels, reflecting a synergistic but mechanistically independent carcinogenic effect beyond mere correlation. In , where contamination is prevalent, urinary and serum biomarkers such as aflatoxin-albumin adducts and aflatoxin-N7-guanine adducts are detectable in over 90% of sampled populations in countries including , , , and , indicating near-ubiquitous low-to-moderate exposure. Dose-response data from human cohorts link chronic aflatoxin B1 intake of 1-20 ng/kg body weight per day—common in high-risk areas—to elevated HCC odds ratios of 3-30, with cancer potency estimates of approximately 0.017-0.3 additional cases per 100,000 person-years per ng/kg/day exposure. Globally, an estimated 4.5 billion people in tropical and subtropical regions face some aflatoxin exposure risk, though acute clinical aflatoxicosis remains underreported outside outbreaks, with chronic effects manifesting primarily as and hepatocarcinogenesis over decades.

Synergistic Risks with Viral Infections

Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) exposure exhibits a synergistic interaction with chronic (HBV) infection in elevating the risk of (HCC), with prospective cohort studies demonstrating multiplicative effects beyond additive risks. In regions with high AFB1 contamination, such as parts of , the odds ratio (OR) for HCC among HBV carriers with elevated urinary AFB1 biomarkers reached 36.9 compared to those without markers, while high versus low AFB1 exposure in carriers yielded an OR of 7.6; similar synergism appeared in African cohorts, where combined exposure amplified risks with ORs exceeding 40 in case-control analyses integrated with cohort data. This interaction is quantified as approximately 30-fold higher HCC risk for co-exposure relative to HBV alone (OR ~10–15) or AFB1 alone (OR ~3–6), as evidenced by nested case-control studies within prospective designs tracking biomarkers and . The underlying mechanism involves HBV's impairment of DNA repair processes critical for resolving AFB1-induced adducts. AFB1 metabolizes to a reactive forming adducts (primarily AFB1-N7-Gua), which are typically excised via (NER); however, the HBV X protein inhibits NER, promoting persistence, at p53 codon 249 (a mutation in ~50% of AFB1-associated HCCs), and clonal expansion in chronically inflamed livers. This causal arises from viral modulation of host repair pathways rather than direct enhancement of AFB1 bioactivation, as confirmed in cellular models and epidemiological correlations of levels with HCC incidence in HBV-endemic areas. In HBV-prevalent hotspots like and , where dietary AFB1 from staples like and overlaps with 5–10% chronic HBV carriage, this synergism drives disproportionate HCC burdens; for instance, population-attributable risk for aflatoxin-related HCC rises to 21% in HBV-positive groups versus 8.8% in negatives. Intervention evidence from The Gambia's Hepatitis Intervention Study underscores causality, with infant HBV vaccination achieving >90% efficacy against chronic infection and projected reductions in adult HCC attributable to aflatoxin-HBV synergy, as vaccination disrupts the multiplicative pathway without altering toxin exposure.

Detection and Monitoring

Analytical Methods for Food and Feed

Immunoassays, particularly enzyme-linked (ELISA), serve as primary screening tools for aflatoxins in food and feed matrices such as grains, nuts, and animal feeds, offering rapid qualitative or semi-quantitative detection with limits of (LOD) typically ranging from 1 to 5 ppb for total aflatoxins or individual congeners like aflatoxin B1. These antibody-based methods rely on competitive binding between aflatoxins in the sample and enzyme-conjugated aflatoxin derivatives, producing colorimetric signals proportional to contaminant levels, and are advantageous for high-throughput processing in resource-limited settings. However, immunoassays exhibit with structurally similar mycotoxins and require confirmatory analysis to minimize false positives, which can arise from matrix interferences in complex samples like corn or peanuts. Confirmatory techniques prioritize chromatographic separation for precise quantification at parts-per-billion (ppb) levels, emphasizing empirical accuracy through validated protocols. with fluorescence detection (HPLC-FLD), often preceded by immunoaffinity column (IAC) cleanup and post-column derivatization (e.g., using iodine or to enhance fluorescence of aflatoxins B1 and G1), enables detection of aflatoxins B1, B2, G1, and G2 at LODs of 0.1–2 ppb in commodities like and corn. (LC-MS/MS), utilizing and multiple reaction monitoring, provides superior specificity without derivatization, achieving LODs below 0.5 ppb across multi-mycotoxin profiles and accommodating diverse matrices via or QuEChERS cleanup. These methods outperform immunoassays in selectivity, with HPLC-FLD and LC-MS/MS demonstrating recoveries of 80–110% in fortified samples per validation studies.
MethodPrincipleTypical LOD (ppb)AdvantagesLimitations
ELISACompetitive binding1–5Rapid (15–60 min), low cost, field-deployablePotential , semi-quantitative
HPLC-FLDFluorescence after derivatization0.1–2High sensitivity, routine lab useRequires cleanup and derivatization
LC-MS/MSMass-selective detection<0.5Multi-analyte, no derivatizationHigh equipment cost, skilled operation
Post-2020 developments have introduced portable biosensors integrating nanomaterials (e.g., gold nanoparticles or carbon nanotubes) with optical or electrochemical transduction for on-site aflatoxin detection, achieving LODs as low as 0.01 ppb in cereals and enabling smartphone-linked readout for real-time monitoring without extensive sample preparation. These advances build on aptamer or antibody immobilization for enhanced stability and specificity, facilitating decentralized testing in agricultural supply chains. Validation of these methods adheres to AOAC International standards, such as Official Method 2005.08 for LC-MS/MS or modifications of 991.31 for HPLC-FLD, which stipulate parameters including linearity (R² > 0.99), precision (RSD <15% at ppb levels), and specificity in spiked matrices to ensure reliability across food and feed types like botanical roots or grains. Collaborative studies confirm low false-positive rates, with immunoaffinity-based cleanups yielding >95% specificity in naturally contaminated samples when coupled to confirmatory detection.

Biomarkers and Exposure Assessment in Humans

Urinary aflatoxin B1-N7-guanine (AFB1-N7-Gua) adducts serve as a primary short-term of aflatoxin in s, reflecting recent dietary due to their rapid formation and following AFB1 and DNA adduction. These adducts are detectable in urine via methods such as coupled with , providing a noninvasive measure of genotoxic over hours to days. Their levels correlate with AFB1 dose in kinetic models, where rates align with metabolic activation pathways observed in human and animal studies. Serum albumin-AFB1 adducts, particularly the AFB1-lysine form, function as a longer-term , accumulating with chronic exposure because albumin's in humans is approximately 20-30 days. This allows quantification of integrated exposure over weeks to months, with adduct levels up to 30-fold higher under sustained intake compared to acute dosing, as validated by isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Kinetic modeling links these adducts to AFB1 , enabling estimation of average daily intake from blood samples in cohorts. In population studies, such as those in high-risk regions of , elevated urinary AFB1-N7-Gua and serum albumin adduct levels have been associated with (HCC) clusters, particularly where aflatoxin exposure coincides with prevalence. For instance, in Guangdong province, biomarker data indicated HCC incidence risks of 0.359 cases per 100,000 persons annually attributable to aflatoxins, underscoring their utility in epidemiological risk assessment. These markers have been employed in prospective cohorts to predict HCC development, with odds ratios increasing dose-dependently in adduct-positive individuals. Limitations include the transient nature of urinary AFB1-N7-Gua, which captures only recent exposure ( ~7.5 hours) and may miss chronic patterns, whereas albumin adducts better reflect sustained intake but require sampling and are influenced by individual metabolic variations. Complementary use of both, informed by pharmacokinetic models, enhances accuracy, though inter-individual differences in necessitate validation against dietary surveys.

Prevention and Control Measures

Pre-Harvest Agricultural Practices

Pre-harvest agricultural practices aim to minimize Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus colonization in crops such as maize, peanuts, and groundnuts by addressing environmental stressors and fungal inoculum sources. Crop rotation with non-host plants disrupts fungal spore persistence in soil, reducing subsequent contamination risks; for instance, rotating maize with legumes or cereals has been shown to lower aflatoxin levels through decreased A. flavus populations and improved soil health. Timely irrigation mitigates drought stress, a key trigger for aflatoxin biosynthesis, with applications 3–4 weeks pre-harvest significantly curbing A. flavus invasion in groundnuts by maintaining crop vigor and kernel integrity. Selection of resistant or tolerant varieties further limits kernel infection and aflatoxin accumulation, as these cultivars exhibit physical barriers like intact pericarp or biochemical defenses against fungal penetration. While complete remains elusive, efforts have yielded varieties that substantially reduce infection rates under conditions, often integrated with other practices for enhanced efficacy. , including targeted insecticide applications, breaks insect-fungus synergies by preventing damage from pests like the corn earworm or peanut pod borers, which create entry points for toxigenic fungi; studies confirm that such controls diminish pre-harvest aflatoxin buildup in susceptible crops. Biocontrol using atoxigenic Aspergillus flavus strains represents a cornerstone of pre-harvest mitigation, particularly in and . USDA-approved products like Afla-Guard, comprising non-toxigenic isolates, are applied as or foliar sprays to outcompete aflatoxigenic strains, achieving 80–95% reductions in (AFB1) levels in field trials; for example, formulations reduced contamination by an average of 92% in over multi-year studies. These strains establish dominance in the crop and , diluting toxigenic populations without yield penalties, as evidenced by consistent efficacy across U.S. and international peanut fields. Yield trial data from biocontrol applications further demonstrate no adverse impacts on peanut productivity while sustaining low aflatoxin profiles over seasons.

Post-Harvest Handling and Storage Techniques

Rapid drying of harvested grains to a content below 13% is critical to inhibit growth and aflatoxin production, as levels above this threshold enable fungal proliferation even at ambient temperatures. In , achieving this through methods like drying on tarpaulins or mechanical dryers within 48-72 hours post-harvest can reduce initial (AFB1) levels by up to 50% compared to sun-drying on bare ground, based on field trials in where improved drying practices alone contributed to overall contamination reductions of 53%. Sorting techniques further mitigate contamination by physically removing damaged or moldy kernels, which serve as primary infection sites. Manual sorting by can decrease aflatoxin levels by 40-80% in and groundnuts by discarding visibly infected grains, though efficacy depends on labor quality and initial contamination severity. Advanced optical sorters employing near-infrared () detect subtle fluorescence or spectral signatures of aflatoxins, rejecting contaminated kernels with reported reductions exceeding 80% in pilot-scale processing and achieving post-sorting levels below 10 μg/kg in highly contaminated peanut lots. Storage practices emphasize controlled environments to maintain low moisture and oxygen levels. systems in circulate cool air to equalize below 20°C and moisture under 13%, suppressing resurgence without introducing contaminants. bags, such as Purdue Improved Storage (PICS) systems, create conditions that limit fungal growth and aflatoxin accumulation, with studies showing sustained efficacy over multiple seasons in maintaining aflatoxin below detectable thresholds when sealed properly. For decontamination of mildly contaminated lots, chemical treatments like gaseous or application offer targeted reductions. gas treatment at elevated temperatures (e.g., 100°C for 30-60 minutes) can degrade over 99% of AFB1 in grains while preserving nutritional value, though it requires controlled facilities to manage residues. fumigation, applied at 50-100 ppm for 1-2 hours, oxidizes aflatoxins by 70-90% on grain surfaces without leaving harmful byproducts, as validated in and trials, but penetration into kernels is limited for deeply embedded toxins. These methods are most effective when integrated with initial physical handling to avoid reliance on post-contamination fixes.

Emerging Biotechnological and Detoxification Methods

Recent developments in gene editing technologies, particularly CRISPR-Cas9, have targeted susceptibility genes in crops to confer resistance to infection and subsequent aflatoxin production. In , precision breeding approaches focusing on of genes involved in fungal colonization have shown promise in reducing aflatoxin levels under field conditions, with edited lines exhibiting up to 70% lower contamination compared to susceptible varieties in preliminary trials conducted in 2024-2025. Similar strategies are under exploration for , where editing transcription factors regulating drought stress and kernel integrity—key enablers of fungal invasion—aim to minimize pre-harvest aflatoxin accumulation, though field efficacy data remain limited to lab validations as of 2025. These methods leverage undiluted causal mechanisms, such as disrupting entry points, but require rigorous multi-year field testing to confirm stability across environments. Enzymatic detoxification, especially via laccases derived from fungi like , has emerged as a targeted approach to degrade aflatoxins post-contamination. Laccases catalyze the oxidative cleavage of the difurocoumarin ring in (AFB1), rendering it non-toxic; studies from 2023 reported degradation rates exceeding 80% within hours under optimized conditions, with breakdown products confirmed non-hepatotoxic via assays. A 2024 engineered laccase variant (Lac-W) achieved 88% AFB1 degradation alongside partial breakdown of other mycotoxins, demonstrating broad-spectrum potential without requiring mediators. Field-scale application, however, involves on supports for feed processing, with pilot tests in 2022-2023 showing 50-70% AFB1 reduction in contaminated , though stability under varying and poses ongoing hurdles. Microbial adsorbents, including yeast cell walls and probiotic bacteria, bind aflatoxins in the , substantially lowering . Saccharomyces cerevisiae extracts reduced AFB1 absorption by 40-60% in rodent models exposed to contaminated feed, as measured by urinary biomarkers and tissue residues in 2021-2022 studies. strains, such as Lactobacillus casei, exhibit similar binding via cell wall mannoproteins, with in vivo trials indicating up to 55% decreased in fed AFB1-spiked diets. Clay-based binders like and hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate complement these by sequestering aflatoxins in feed, with field data from swine and operations (2020-2023) documenting approximately 50% reductions in absorbed toxin levels and mitigated growth suppression. Despite these advances, challenges persist in scalability for large-scale , particularly in developing regions with high aflatoxin , where cost, residue , and regulatory approval for genetically edited crops hinder adoption. Enzymatic and adsorbent methods risk incomplete or binding, necessitating hybrid approaches validated through longitudinal field data; as of 2025, no single method achieves >90% efficacy across diverse matrices without trade-offs. Ongoing emphasizes integrated omics-guided optimization to enhance causal efficacy while minimizing unintended effects.

Regulatory and Economic Dimensions

Global Standards and Limits

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), under the (WHO), classifies aflatoxins as Group 1 carcinogens, indicating sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans, primarily through genotoxic mechanisms without an established safe threshold. Risk assessments by bodies like the (EFSA) and WHO Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) derive limits from models such as the benchmark dose lower confidence limit (BMDL10) of 0.4 μg/kg body weight per day for incidence in animal studies, extrapolated to humans via potency factors. These assessments balance empirical dose-response data from epidemiological studies in high-exposure regions (e.g., and ) with practical feasibility, acknowledging uncertainties in low-dose extrapolation due to the absence of causal thresholds for DNA-adduct formation. The Commission, a joint FAO/WHO body, establishes international reference maximum levels for total aflatoxins (sum of B1, B2, G1, G2) at 15 μg/kg in commodities like , , and tree nuts intended for direct human consumption, with 10 μg/kg for those for further processing (e.g., figs). For specifically, Codex recommends 5 μg/kg in certain ready-to-eat foods, reflecting harmonized risk management to facilitate trade while minimizing exposure. These levels apply the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle, prioritizing reduction without due to ubiquitous natural occurrence and analytical detection limits, though critics argue such arbitrary caps overlook variability in human susceptibility (e.g., HBV co-infection multipliers) and may impose disproportionate costs absent direct causal proof of harm at trace levels.
Jurisdiction/BodyCommodity ExampleAflatoxin B1 Limit (μg/kg)Total Aflatoxins Limit (μg/kg)
(direct consumption)-15
US FDA (action level, human food)General foods (e.g., corn, nuts)-20
(Regulation 1881/2006, as amended)Nuts/dried fruits (direct consumption)24
Infant formulae/processed cereal-based foods0.10.25
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sets an action level of 20 μg/kg total aflatoxins for most human foods, triggering advisory or seizure actions based on 1969-era analytical capabilities and risk data, with no separate B1 limit but heightened scrutiny for milk (aflatoxin M1 at 0.5 μg/kg). In contrast, the enforces stricter maxima under Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006, such as 2 μg/kg for AFB1 and 4 μg/kg total in nuts for direct consumption, derived from EFSA's margin-of-exposure analyses emphasizing precautionary data. For foods, EU limits approach at 0.1 μg/kg AFB1, justified by vulnerable populations' higher relative intake and lack of metabolic detoxification, though debates persist on whether such stringency reflects empirical risk or over-reliance on linear no-threshold models without human threshold validation. Global variability arises as exporting nations often adopt stricter export standards (e.g., EU-compliant <4 μg/kg) than domestic ones in aflatoxin-endemic areas, where limits may exceed 20-50 μg/kg to accommodate agricultural realities, potentially underestimating chronic low-level risks but aligning with causal evidence that dominates outbreaks over cancer at sub-ppb exposures. The ALARA principle underpins these frameworks, advocating minimization amid no observed safe levels, yet first-principles scrutiny reveals thresholds may exist below detection for non-genotoxic effects, challenging uniform application without region-specific exposure data.

Enforcement Challenges and Trade Implications

Enforcement of aflatoxin regulations in developing regions of and faces significant hurdles due to limited , insufficient trained personnel, and inconsistent regulatory frameworks, leading to widespread under-detection of in staple crops like and . In , smallholder farmers often lack access to reliable testing, exacerbating risks during post-harvest storage under humid conditions that favor mold growth. These gaps result in contaminated products evading domestic controls and entering informal networks, where routes bypass border inspections, as seen in cross-border flows in . Strict import standards in the and have triggered substantial trade rejections, with aflatoxin contamination accounting for a leading cause of border alerts from 2002 to 2008. exporters incur annual losses estimated at $670 million from rejections of groundnuts and other commodities exceeding the 4 μg/kg total aflatoxin limit, diverting trade to less regulated markets or domestic consumption with heightened risks. Globally, such rejections contribute to $6–18 billion in yearly economic losses across trade disruptions, spoilage, and forgone exports for producers in and . For instance, Indian shipments have faced repeated scrutiny and outright suspensions, as evidenced by heightened rejections prompting exporters to invest in pre-shipment testing to mitigate losses exceeding $200 million annually in affected years. Market-driven certification schemes have emerged as incentives for compliance, enabling exporters to access premium markets by verifying low aflatoxin levels through third-party audits. In , aflatoxin-safe labeling has increased trader willingness to pay premiums of up to 10%, fostering adoption of drying and storage technologies among smallholders to meet thresholds. Similar programs in demonstrate that economic pressures from rejection risks outperform voluntary domestic enforcement, with certified batches commanding higher prices and reducing overall trade barriers. However, scalability remains challenged by certification costs, which disproportionately burden small-scale producers without subsidies.

Economic Costs to Agriculture and Public Health

Aflatoxin contamination imposes substantial economic burdens on through crop discards, yield downgrades, and trade restrictions, as contaminated commodities often fail to meet standards, leading to rejection or destruction. Global annual losses from these impacts, including foregone sales and processing costs, are estimated at USD 6–18 billion, driven largely by contamination in staple like , , and tree nuts in tropical regions. In , where environmental conditions favor Aspergillus fungal growth, these losses exceed USD 750 million yearly, accounting for a significant share of agricultural GDP in vulnerable countries and exacerbating insecurity. Public health costs stem primarily from aflatoxin B1's carcinogenicity, which synergizes with to elevate (HCC) incidence; worldwide, 25,200–155,000 HCC cases per year are attributable to aflatoxin exposure, with over 90% occurring in high-prevalence areas like and . Treatment for aflatoxin-linked HCC, involving , , or , burdens healthcare systems in these regions, where per-case costs can reach thousands of USD amid limited resources, though aggregated figures are integrated into total economic models rather than isolated. Chronic low-level exposure also impairs child growth, associating with stunting in epidemiological studies across and , where elevated urinary aflatoxin biomarkers correlate with reduced height-for-age z-scores and long-term cognitive deficits. These health effects compound agricultural losses via productivity drags, as stunted children face diminished and workforce output, potentially reducing national GDP by percentages attributable to exposure in endemic zones; for instance, interventions modeling aflatoxin reduction project gains in equivalent to billions in averted economic drag over decades. Overall, the interplay of direct agricultural and indirect health sequelae underscores aflatoxin's role as a persistent barrier to in contamination hotspots.

Major Outbreaks and Incidents

Historical Outbreaks Pre-2000

One of the earliest documented aflatoxin outbreaks occurred in 1960 in , known as "Turkey X disease," which affected over 100,000 turkey poults fed contaminated peanut meal imported from . The birds exhibited hemorrhage, liver damage, and high mortality, later traced to aflatoxins produced by in the moldy feed, marking the initial discovery of these mycotoxins. This event prompted global investigations into fungal toxins in agriculture, revealing similar vulnerabilities in stored grains and feeds. In 1967, the first reported case of acute human aflatoxicosis occurred in , where a teenager died from after prolonged consumption of contaminated with aflatoxins at levels exceeding safe thresholds. Necropsy confirmed massive hepatic consistent with toxicity, highlighting risks from staple crops in tropical regions prone to post-harvest growth. A major human outbreak struck in 1974, primarily in drought-affected districts of and , resulting in at least 106 deaths among populations reliant on as a staple. Affected individuals consumed heavily infested corn harboring Aspergillus flavus, with aflatoxin levels in samples reaching thousands of micrograms per , leading to symptoms of acute including , abdominal swelling, and rapid . The episode was exacerbated by delayed diagnosis, as initial cases were misattributed to infectious causes, amplifying mortality before targeted interventions like food withdrawal were implemented. Pre-2000 incidents also included aflatoxin poisonings in animals, such as a 1998 U.S. contamination event linked to corn-based , where elevated aflatoxin concentrations caused liver and deaths in at least 25 s across multiple states. Earlier animal cases, including fatalities in during the 1960s from moldy feed, underscored aflatoxin's potency in pets, often due to concentrated exposure in commercial or home-prepared diets without routine testing. These outbreaks revealed systemic gaps in feed quality monitoring and rapid veterinary response, contributing to preventable losses before regulatory frameworks strengthened surveillance. In 2004, experienced one of the largest recorded outbreaks of acute aflatoxicosis, with 317 cases and 125 deaths reported by July 20, primarily in eastern and from consumption of homegrown contaminated with aflatoxin levels exceeding 8,000 μg/kg in some samples. The incident was exacerbated by drought conditions favoring Aspergillus flavus proliferation and inadequate post-harvest drying, leading to a of 39%. From 2021 to 2023, contamination in Serbian surged, with 73.2% of samples in 2022 exceeding the regulatory limit of 4 μg/kg for unprocessed intended for direct human consumption. Non-compliance rates for in rose from 8.3% in 2021 to 23.2% in 2023, attributed to warmer, drier summers promoting fungal growth during the pre-harvest phase. Similar spikes were noted across southern and , where climate-driven shifts expanded suitable conditions for aflatoxigenic molds northward. In the United States, mechanistic and models developed in predict heightened aflatoxin outbreak risks in through 2030, correlating hot-humid conditions and data on stress with hotspots exceeding 20 μg/kg. These projections indicate potential expansion into mid-latitude corn belts under projected warming scenarios. Overall trends from 2000 to 2025 show increasing aflatoxin prevalence in warming regions, with the reporting in March 2025 that rising temperatures and erratic precipitation are shifting risks northward, favoring A. flavus in temperate maize-growing areas previously at low risk. Global analyses confirm that such climate patterns have doubled suitable habitats for aflatoxin production in parts of and since 2000.

Controversies and Broader Contexts

Debates on Safe Exposure Levels

The debate on safe exposure levels for aflatoxins centers on whether genotoxic mechanisms, particularly formation by , imply a strict linear no-threshold (LNT) model with no safe dose, or if practical thresholds exist based on biological repair, non-linearity at low doses, and risk principles. , classified as a human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer due to its direct , forms persistent DNA adducts such as the ring-opened aflatoxin-FAPyGua form, which accumulate linearly with dose even at low exposures in models, supporting the absence of a practical threshold. These adducts persist due to incomplete , providing causal evidence of mutagenic potential without observable no-effect levels in empirical data. Critics of absolute LNT application, often from perspectives favoring thresholds for genotoxins, cite studies showing potential non-linearity at sub-microgram doses where repair outpaces formation, questioning low-dose from high-dose data. However, such arguments are countered by studies detecting adducts from low-level dietary , as in regions with intermittent , reinforcing genotoxic over precautionary overreach. Proponents of fixed parts-per-billion (ppb) limits invoke principles, arguing that analytical detection limits (around 0.5-1 ppb) represent negligible risk without zero-tolerance feasibility, balancing against economic realities in . Regulators typically adhere to the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principle for aflatoxins, prioritizing LNT-derived margins of exposure to minimize risk, while industry viewpoints emphasize evidence-based fixed limits to avoid undue trade barriers, particularly in high-production contexts. In , where under-enforced or absent limits permit exposures exceeding 20-50 ppb in staples like , elevated rates underscore risks of lax standards, with empirical data linking chronic high intake to burdens far above global benchmarks. This disparity highlights causal realism in favoring persistence as a over variable regulatory philosophies, urging prioritization of verifiable genotoxic endpoints in debates.

Historical Bioweapon Research and Potential Misuses

During the 1980s, pursued the development of aflatoxin as part of its biological weapons program, initiating production around 1988 at facilities including the Al-Salman complex. Iraqi scientists produced approximately 2,200 liters of concentrated aflatoxin solution by 1990, weaponizing it into munitions such as R-400 aerial bombs and Al-Hussein missile warheads for potential deployment against enemy forces or populations. This effort was driven by the toxin's carcinogenic and hepatotoxic properties, intended to cause long-term debilitation including and immune suppression, though no verified battlefield use occurred. Post-Gulf War inspections by the (UNSCOM) confirmed the program's scope, with declaring unilateral destruction of agents and delivery systems in 1991, though full verification proved challenging due to incomplete documentation. Aflatoxin's suitability as a bioweapon was limited by its delayed onset of effects, typically requiring chronic exposure over days to weeks for or months for carcinogenic outcomes, rendering it ineffective for rapid incapacitation in tactical scenarios. U.S. assessments prior to the 1991 dismissed aflatoxin as a practical agent, citing its lack of immediate lethality, environmental instability, and challenges in delivery without degradation. Unlike faster-acting toxins such as botulinum, aflatoxin's primary impact on liver function and does not align with warfare demands for prompt disruption, leading to its classification as having negligible short-term utility. Historical programs in other nations, including U.S. and Soviet toxin research during the , focused on more viable agents like or mycotoxins rather than aflatoxin, with no declassified evidence of dedicated aflatoxin testing such as proposed shipboard simulations. Potential misuses extend to non-state actors or via deliberate of supplies, analogous to accidental aflatoxin outbreaks in agricultural products like the 2005-2006 U.S. pet recalls affecting thousands of animals through tainted . Such acts could exploit aflatoxin's natural occurrence in crops under stress, amplifying economic and disruptions without requiring advanced weaponization, though detection methods and regulatory mitigate risks. Dual-use concerns arise from fungal strains (e.g., ) used in legitimate research for agriculture or detoxification, which could be redirected for toxin production, prompting protocols to screen efforts. Nonetheless, aflatoxin's low dispersibility and predictable environmental persistence favor accidental or covert over overt bioweapon deployment, underscoring its marginal role in modern threat assessments.

References

  1. [1]
    Mycotoxins - World Health Organization (WHO)
    Oct 2, 2023 · Aflatoxins are amongst the most poisonous mycotoxins and are produced by certain moulds (Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus) which ...Key Facts · Overview · Mycotoxins Commonly Found In...
  2. [2]
    AFLATOXINS - Chemical Agents and Related Occupations - NCBI
    Aflatoxins are produced primarily by the common fungus Aspergillus flavus and the closely related species A. parasiticus.
  3. [3]
    Aflatoxin Toxicity - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf - NIH
    Aflatoxins are found in various kinds of cereal, oilseeds, spices, nuts, and animal products. Therefore, patients should be wise in their selection of food ...
  4. [4]
    Aflatoxin Contamination, Its Impact and Management Strategies - NIH
    Aflatoxin, a type of mycotoxin, is mostly produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus. It is responsible for the loss of billions of dollars ...
  5. [5]
    Aflatoxin: A 50-Year Odyssey of Mechanistic and Translational ...
    Aflatoxin exposures have also been demonstrated to multiplicatively increase the risk of liver cancer in people chronically infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV) ...
  6. [6]
    Incidence and mortality of acute aflatoxicosis: A systematic review
    IARC has classified AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 and AFM1 as group 1 according to their carcinogenicity to humans, i.e. being confirmedly carcinogenic (IARC, 2021).
  7. [7]
    [PDF] RoC Profile: Aflatoxins - National Toxicology Program
    Meat, eggs, milk, and other edible products from animals that consume aflatoxin-contam- inated feed also are sources of potential exposure. Although afla- toxin ...
  8. [8]
    Aflatoxins: A Global Concern for Food Safety, Human Health and ...
    Jan 17, 2017 · Aflatoxins are one of the highly toxic secondary metabolites derived from polyketides produced by fungal species such as Aspergillus flavus, A.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  9. [9]
    Aflatoxins in Food and Feed: An Overview on Prevalence, Detection ...
    Oct 4, 2019 · Contaminations by aflatoxins have been reported in food and feed, such as groundnuts, millet, sesame seeds, maize, wheat, rice, fig, spices and ...
  10. [10]
    MOLDY PEANUTS AND LIVER CANCERS - JAMA Network
    In 1960 a new disease killed more than 100,000 turkeys in the south and east of England. In the unimaginative way of science, it was called turkey "X" ...Missing: facts | Show results with:facts
  11. [11]
    Toxicity associated with Certain Samples of Groundnuts - Nature
    LARGE numbers of turkey poults1 and ducklings2 died on British farms in 1960 as a result of consuming groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) meal imported from Brazil ...
  12. [12]
    Aflatoxins - Cornell University Department of Animal Science
    ... peanut meal was highly toxic to poultry and ducklings with symptoms typical of Turkey X disease. Speculations made during 1960 regarding the nature of the ...Missing: groundnut facts
  13. [13]
    Aflatoxins: History, Significant Milestones, Recent Data on Their ...
    Aspergillus flavus toxin gave rise to the name aflatoxin. The name aflatoxin was given to the toxic substance, which has since been found to contain several ...
  14. [14]
    DISCOVERY OF AFLATOXINS AND SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL ...
    The discovery of aflatoxins began immediately after an outbreak of a disease of turkeys of unknown etiology in England in 1960. The disease was called Turkey “X ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
  15. [15]
    Discovery of aflatoxins and significant historical features
    Aug 6, 2025 · Turkey X disease was ultimately linked to fodder contaminated with high concentrations of a toxic compound now known as aflatoxin (Richard, 2008) ...
  16. [16]
    I. Thin-layer chromatography of the aflatoxins - ScienceDirect.com
    A fast and facile method was developed for on-site detection of aflatoxins (AFs) in moldy agricultural products using thin layer chromatography combined with ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] After oil is extracted from cottonseed, most of the meal ... - USDA ARS
    About 80 percent of U.S. cottonseed production is crushed for oil; most of the cottonseed meal that remains after oil is extracted is used to feed cattle.
  18. [18]
    Russell Sinnhuber - OSU Seafood Lab - Oregon State University
    From his research in the 1960s, he determined that a potent chemical carcinogen, aflatoxin, found in moldy cottonseed meal, caused liver cancer in hatchery ...
  19. [19]
    Emeritus: On the trail of aflatoxin | MIT News
    Dec 6, 2010 · Wogan and George Buchi, a natural-products chemist in MIT's Department of Chemistry, became the first to figure out aflatoxin's structure and ...
  20. [20]
    Aflatoxins: Producing-Molds, Structure, Health Issues and Incidence ...
    This review aims to update the main aspects of aflatoxin production, occurrence and incidence in selected countries, and associated aflatoxicosis outbreaks.
  21. [21]
    Aflatoxin G1 - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    Chemical structure of aflatoxin B1. View chapterExplore book · Read full ... AFs are difuranocoumarin derivatives composed by two furan rings, linked with each ...
  22. [22]
    Aflatoxins | C17H12O7 | CID 14421 - PubChem - NIH
    Aflatoxins are produced by toxigenic strains of Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus on peanuts, soybeans, corn, and other cereals(2,4), as well as fruits and ...
  23. [23]
    A DFT study on degradation of aflatoxin B1 using some reactive ...
    The toxic potencies order of aflatoxins is AFB1 > AFG1 > AFB2 > AFG2 in such a manner that the toxicity of AFG1, AFB2, and AFG2 is approximately 50, 20 and 10 ...
  24. [24]
    Aflatoxin M2 | C17H14O7 | CID 10903619 - PubChem - NIH
    These are polycyclic aromatic compounds containing a cyclopenten-2-one ring fused to the coumarin moiety of the difurocoumarin skeleton.
  25. [25]
    Risk assessment of aflatoxins in food - PMC - PubMed Central - NIH
    For AFM1, a potency factor of 0.1 relative to AFB1 was used. For AFG1, AFB2 and AFG2, the in vivo data are not sufficient to derive potency factors and equal ...
  26. [26]
    Thermal stability of aflatoxin B1 and ochratoxin A - PubMed
    As a result it can be said that OTA seems to be stable up to 180 °C; however aflatoxin B1 was almost completely degraded at heating temperatures of 160 °C and ...
  27. [27]
    Current Major Degradation Methods for Aflatoxins: A Review
    Furthermore, the degradation temperature for aflatoxins is 268-269°C (Peng et al., 2018) . These reports indicate that simple drying techniques do not allow the ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  28. [28]
    The fate of mycotoxins during thermal food processing - SCI Journals
    Jan 6, 2009 · Most mycotoxins are heat-resistant within the range of conventional food-processing temperatures (80–121 °C), so little or no reduction in ...
  29. [29]
    Aflatoxigenic Fungi of Concern in Foods and Feeds † : A Review
    Aspergillus flavus and the closely related subspecies parasiticus have long been recognized as major contaminants of organic and nonorganic items.
  30. [30]
    Growth and Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1, and G2 Production by Aspergillus ...
    The objectives of this study were to determine the growth of two toxigenic fungi, Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus, and to quantify the concentrations of ...
  31. [31]
    Production of Aflatoxin B1 by Aspergillus parasiticus Grown on a ...
    AFs are produced primarily by Aspergillus parasiticus and Aspergillus flavus strains. Toxigenic A. flavus strains produce AFB1 and AFB2, whereas A. parasiticus ...
  32. [32]
    Variability among atoxigenic Aspergillus flavus strains in ability to ...
    Five strains of Aspergillus flavus lacking the ability to produce aflatoxins were examined in greenhouse tests for the ability to prevent a toxigenic strain ...
  33. [33]
    Genetic and Toxigenic Variability within Aspergillus flavus ... - Frontiers
    The aim of this study is to analyse the genetic variability among 109 A. flavus isolates previously recovered from maize sampled from a known aflatoxin-hotspot.
  34. [34]
    [PDF] FINAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF Aspergillus oryzae - EPA
    While wild A. flavus isolates readily produce aflatoxins and other mycotoxins, A. oryzae has not been shown to be capable of aflatoxin production. History ...
  35. [35]
    Non-Aflatoxigenicity of Commercial Aspergillus oryzae Strains Due ...
    Cultural and HPLC analyses showed that none of the commercial strains produced detectable amount of aflatoxins. According to the molecular analysis of 17 genes ...<|separator|>
  36. [36]
    Aflatoxin Biosynthesis and Genetic Regulation: A Review - PMC - NIH
    This review provides an overview of the factors interacting with the aflatoxin gene cluster and hence aflatoxin production in Aspergillus species.
  37. [37]
    Clustered Pathway Genes in Aflatoxin Biosynthesis - PMC - NIH
    One gene to whole pathway: the role of norsolorinic acid in aflatoxin research. ... gene encoding the aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway regulatory protein AFLR.
  38. [38]
    Aflatoxin Biosynthesis, Genetic Regulation, Toxicity, and ... - MDPI
    Norsolorinic acid (NOR) is the primary step ... pathway regulator aflR induces gene transcription inside and outside of the aflatoxin biosynthetic cluster.
  39. [39]
    Norsolorinic Acid - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    The biosynthetic pathway of aflatoxin biosynthesis has been proposed from studies on co-metabolite analysis, precursor feeding, and model chemical reaction ...
  40. [40]
    Clustered Pathway Genes in Aflatoxin Biosynthesis - ASM Journals
    One gene to whole pathway: the role of norsolorinic acid in aflatoxin research. ... gene encoding the aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway regulatory protein AFLR.
  41. [41]
    Effect of climate change on Aspergillus flavus and aflatoxin B1 ...
    This review has considered the impact of different key environmental factors on the growth, gene expression and AFB 1 production by A. flavus.
  42. [42]
    Recent progress of the effect of environmental factors on Aspergillus ...
    Feb 28, 2020 · Water activity, temperature, CO2, and pH are major environmental factors affecting Aspergillus flavus growth and aflatoxin production. Water ...
  43. [43]
    Transcriptomic responses of Aspergillus flavus to temperature and ...
    Feb 2, 2021 · Aflatoxin is a group of polyketide-derived carcinogenic and mutagenic secondary metabolites produced by Aspergillus flavus that negatively ...Results · Transcriptome Sequencing · Aflatoxin Analysis<|control11|><|separator|>
  44. [44]
    Genome sequence and comparative analyses of atoxigenic ...
    In this study, we sequenced the genome and transcriptome of atoxigenic (does not produce aflatoxin or cyclopiazonic acid) A. flavus strain WRRL 1519 isolated ...
  45. [45]
    Potential of Atoxigenic Aspergillus flavus Vegetative Compatibility ...
    In this study, 12 genetically diverse atoxigenic African A. flavus VCGs (AAVs) were identified from fungal communities associated with maize and groundnut ...
  46. [46]
    Aflatoxin Contamination of Maize, Groundnut, and Sorghum Grown ...
    Mean aflatoxin concentrations in maize were high, 128, 517, and 659 µg/kg in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger, respectively. The estimated probable daily intake ( ...2.3. Aflatoxin... · 4. Burkina Faso · 6. Niger
  47. [47]
    Update on mycotoxin contamination of maize and peanuts in East ...
    The highest reported aflatoxin contamination levels in maize and peanuts among the East African Community countries were 48,000μg/kg and 7,525μg/kg ...<|separator|>
  48. [48]
    Global Risk Assessment of Aflatoxins in Maize and Peanuts
    Aflatoxins contaminate a variety of staple foods including maize, peanuts, milk, dried fruits, and tree nuts and cause an array of acute and chronic human ...
  49. [49]
    The prevalence of aflatoxins in different nut samples - AIMS Press
    The mean concentration of aflatoxin total (AFT) and AFB1 in nuts were as follows: peanut (37.85, 32.82 μg/kg), pistachio (31.42, 39.44 μg/kg), almond (3.54, ...
  50. [50]
    The impacts of feeds and seasons on aflatoxin content of milk from ...
    234 of 550 feed samples were positive for aflatoxin. High AFB1 content of feeds were corn silage, cottonseed meal, peanut silage and corn.
  51. [51]
    How to deal with feed ingredients prone to aflatoxin contamination
    Nov 27, 2023 · Cottonseed meal: Cottonseed meal can be contaminated with aflatoxins during the harvesting and storage processes. As a large part of cottonseeds ...
  52. [52]
    Full article: Worldwide contamination of food-crops with mycotoxins
    Sep 3, 2019 · Amongst the around 14,400 globally collected feed samples in 2016–2017, the highest AF-incidence of 23% was found in nearly 7000 samples from ...
  53. [53]
    Effect of Temperature and Relative Humidity on Growth of ... - NIH
    Sep 6, 2018 · Gqaleni et al. [32] reported that the optimum temperature for maximum aflatoxin production by A. flavus was 30 °C, with further temperature ...
  54. [54]
    Aspergillus flavus growth and aflatoxin B1 prediction - PubMed Central
    May 23, 2024 · According to the model maximum aflatoxin production is expected at 30% moisture and 25°C temperature, after 6 days in the aerobic phase.
  55. [55]
    Full article: Effect of Temperature and Relative Humidity on Growth ...
    Sep 6, 2018 · In this study, we evaluated the effect of different temperatures (10, 20, 30, and 40 °C) and relative humidities (RHs; 12, 44, 76, and 98%) ...
  56. [56]
  57. [57]
    Drought stress and preharvest aflatoxin contamination in agricultural ...
    Chronic problems with preharvest aflatoxin contamination occur in the southern US, and are particularly troublesome in corn, peanut, cottonseed, and tree nuts.
  58. [58]
    Relationship between Aflatoxin Contamination and Physiological ...
    Increased aflatoxin contamination in corn by the fungus Aspergillus flavus is associated with frequent periods of drought and heat stress during the ...
  59. [59]
    Although drought intensity increases aflatoxin contamination ...
    Feb 1, 2014 · Drought stress is known to increase aflatoxin contamination in groundnut and establishing a possible relationship between drought tolerance and resistance to ...
  60. [60]
    Drought Stress and Preharvest Aflatoxin Contamination in ...
    Various approaches have been suggested for genetic control of preharvest aflatoxin contamination including the development and use of crops with resistance to ...
  61. [61]
    Yield, Insect-Derived Ear Injury, and Aflatoxin Among ...
    Sep 26, 2020 · The most promising hybrid testcrosses had lower ear injury and aflatoxin accumulation, and good yield under varying heat and moisture stress.Missing: entry | Show results with:entry
  62. [62]
    Prediction of aflatoxin contamination outbreaks in Texas corn using ...
    Mar 5, 2025 · The objective of our research is to predict aflatoxin outbreaks in Texas-grown maize using dynamic geospatial data from remote sensing ...Missing: entry | Show results with:entry
  63. [63]
    Determining future aflatoxin contamination risk scenarios for corn in ...
    Jun 29, 2021 · Summer corn crops are very prone to AFs contamination in the Southern USA due to high temperatures, rainfall variability, light textured soils ...<|separator|>
  64. [64]
    Aflatoxin B1 contamination in maize in Europe increases due to ...
    Apr 12, 2016 · Aflatoxin B 1 is predicted to become a food safety issue in maize in Europe, especially in the +2 °C scenario, the most probable scenario of climate change ...<|separator|>
  65. [65]
    Predicted Aflatoxin B1 Increase in Europe Due to Climate Change
    Climate change (CC) is predicted to increase the risk of aflatoxin (AF) contamination in maize, as highlighted by a project supported by EFSA in 2009.
  66. [66]
    Mycotoxin exposure in a changing European climate | Publications
    Mar 10, 2025 · Climate change can change fungal distribution thus increasing human exposure to some mycotoxins and exacerbating their impacts on health.
  67. [67]
    Climate change will increase aflatoxin presence in US Corn
    Apr 25, 2022 · Here we model aflatoxin risk as a function of corn plant growth stages and weather to predict US regions with high aflatoxin risk in 2031–2040, ...
  68. [68]
    New insights into aflatoxin B1 mechanistic toxicology in cattle liver
    Jun 4, 2024 · Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) is a pro-carcinogenic compound bioactivated in the liver by cytochromes P450 (CYPs). In mammals, CYP1A and CYP3A are ...
  69. [69]
    [PDF] Aflatoxin B1: Mechanism, Oxidative Stress and Effects on Animal ...
    Orally ingested AFB1 is metabolized in the liver by the action of the cellular cytochrome P450 (CYP450) enzyme system and aryl hydrocarbon hydroxylase enzyme, ...
  70. [70]
    Aflatoxin B1-induced hepatotoxicity through mitochondrial ...
    This review aims to dissect the complexities of the pathophysiological and molecular mechanisms implicated in hepatotoxicity induced by AFB 1.
  71. [71]
    Biological Action of Mycotoxins - Journal of Dairy Science
    The carcinogenic and mutagenic action of. AFB1 probably is a result of the affinity of the electrophilic and highly reactive AFBI-8,9- epoxide for cellular ...
  72. [72]
    Aflatoxins in Feed: Types, Metabolism, Health Consequences in ...
    Severe toxicity causes collapse and death within several hours, acute toxicity causes death within 12 h, and with subacute toxicity death occurs after about 20 ...
  73. [73]
    FDA/CFSAN Bad Bug Book Aflatoxins
    For most species, the LD50 value ranges from 0.5 to 10 mg/kg body weight. Animal species respond differently in their susceptibility to the chronic and acute ...Missing: ducks rats
  74. [74]
    Hepatoprotective effects of Radix Bupleuri extract on aflatoxin B1 ...
    Sep 15, 2024 · For instance, the LD50 of AFB1 was 56.3, 72.0, and 73.3 mg/kg B.W for mice, chickens, and rats, respectively, while the LD50 for ducklings was ...Missing: birds mammals
  75. [75]
    An unusually high production of hepatic aflatoxin B1-dihydrodiol, the ...
    May 29, 2019 · The sensitivity to the acute effects of AFB1, expressed as LD50 values, ranges from 0,4 mg/kg in day-old ducklings to 6,8 mg/kg in day-old ...Missing: LD50 | Show results with:LD50
  76. [76]
    Species Differences in the Biotransformation of Aflatoxin B1 - MDPI
    The initial discoveries of aflatoxin as a potent hepatotoxin among turkeys, ducks, and certain strains of trout in the early 1960s provided the first insights ...
  77. [77]
    [PDF] Comparative Metabolism of Aflatoxin B1 in Two Quail Genera ...
    Avian species are highly susceptible to the hepatotoxic mycotoxin aflatoxin B1 (AFB1). Domesticated turkeys are exquisitely sensitive, due to a combination of ...<|separator|>
  78. [78]
    Aflatoxin - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
    These toxins were discovered in 1960, after an outbreak in turkeys in England (Turkey X disease). ... Extraction Techniques and Applications: Food and Beverage.
  79. [79]
    Assessing the risk and consequences of naturally occurring ...
    The tolerable consumption levels of aflatoxins for humans have not been set yet, but it is a fact that any level of AFs is not safe for human consumption.<|control11|><|separator|>
  80. [80]
    Chronic and Acute Toxicities of Aflatoxins: Mechanisms of Action
    This study reviews the most recent advances in the field of the mechanisms of toxicity of aflatoxins and the adverse health effects that they cause in humans ...Missing: peer- | Show results with:peer-
  81. [81]
    case study of AFB1, a human carcinogen with a mutagenic mode of ...
    This initial AFB1-induced pro-mutagenic DNA adduct comes from the exo-epoxide, which intercalates into DNA and then binds to the nucleophilic N7-G residue via ...Table 1. Afb1 Data... · Ao: Hepatocellular Carcinoma... · Table 4. Afb1: Formation Of...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] AFLATOXINS 1. Exposure Data - IARC Publications
    Studies evaluated in Volume 56 of the IARC Monographs led to the classification of naturally occurring aflatoxins as carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).
  83. [83]
    Fish models for environmental carcinogenesis: the rainbow trout - NIH
    Dietary chlorophyllin is a potent inhibitor of aflatoxin B1 hepatocarcinogenesis in rainbow trout. ... diethylnitrosamine to rainbow trout and its ...
  84. [84]
    Food Chain Mycotoxin Exposure, Gut Health, and Impaired Growth
    Although there are few human data, animal studies provide evidence that chronic AF exposure retards growth and interferes with micronutrient absorption and ...Missing: immunosuppression | Show results with:immunosuppression
  85. [85]
    Aflatoxicosis: Lessons from Toxicity and Responses to Aflatoxin B1 ...
    This review is a comprehensive introduction to the effects of poultry exposure to the toxic and carcinogenic mycotoxin aflatoxin B1 (AFB1).Aflatoxicosis: Lessons From... · 3. Afb Metabolism And... · 4. Effects Of Afb ExposureMissing: LD50 | Show results with:LD50
  86. [86]
    Prevalence and effects of mycotoxins on poultry health and ...
    Jun 1, 2015 · Aflatoxins cause a variety of effects in poultry, including decreased weight gain, poor feed efficiency, reduced egg production and egg weight, ...
  87. [87]
    Aflatoxin in Iowa – Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal ...
    Species that are highly sensitive are trout, ducks, turkey poults and pre-weaning pigs. Animals that are moderately sensitive include all swine, growing turkeys ...Aflatoxin In Iowa And Nearby... · Sampling · Effects Of Aflatoxin On...
  88. [88]
    A Focus on Aflatoxins in Feedstuffs: Levels of Contamination ...
    Aug 30, 2017 · Ruminants are more resistant to the mycotoxins than non-ruminants animals because the rumen microbiota is capable of degrading toxins. However, ...2. Aflatoxins In Animal Feed · 2.2. Aflatoxins Regulations... · 2.3. Aflatoxins Prevalence...<|control11|><|separator|>
  89. [89]
    Carry-Over of Aflatoxin B1 from Feed to Cow Milk—A Review - NIH
    EFSA estimated a 1–2% transfer rate of AFB1 from feed to AFM1 in milk, although this can increase to even 6% in the case of high-productivity cattle [13].
  90. [90]
    Review on Aflatoxin and its Impacts on Livestock - Juniper Publishers
    May 31, 2018 · Hepatotoxicity, immunosuppression, carcinogenicity and nephrotoxicity are the major effects of aflatoxins. It has gained increasing attention ...
  91. [91]
    [PDF] Aflatoxins in Poultry - Purdue Extension
    AF contamination is still a threat to the poultry industry and results in substantial economic losses to producers because of often sub-lethal, but toxic ...
  92. [92]
    Comprehensive Review of Aflatoxin Contamination, Impact on ...
    As a result of the negative impacts of tainted animal feed, the livestock sectors suffer substantial economic losses. AFB1 levels in poultry feed samples from ...
  93. [93]
    Case–Control Study of an Acute Aflatoxicosis Outbreak, Kenya, 2004
    Objectives: During January–June 2004, an aflatoxicosis outbreak in eastern Kenya resulted in 317 cases and 125 deaths. We conducted a case–control study to ...
  94. [94]
    OUTBREAK OF ACUTE HEPATITIS CAUSED BY AFLATOXIN ...
    Liver tissue at necropsy contained up to 89 p.p.b. of this mycotoxin. Probably most or all of the hepatitis cases were caused by acute aflatoxin poisoning.
  95. [95]
    Population attributable risk of aflatoxin-related liver cancer
    The PAR of aflatoxin-related HCC was estimated at 17% (14–19%) overall, and higher in HBV+ (21%) than HBV− (8.8%) populations.
  96. [96]
    Aflatoxin exposure assessed by aflatoxin albumin adduct biomarker ...
    Here, we review our recent studies of human exposure in six African countries; Gambia, Guinea, Kenya, Senegal, Tanzania and Uganda.
  97. [97]
    Effect on public health of a possible increase of the maximum level ...
    Feb 8, 2018 · The cancer potencies for an AFB1 exposure of 1 ng/kg body weight (bw) per day (in 100,000 person years) were estimated to be 0.017 (mean ...
  98. [98]
    The occurrence and human health risk assessment of total ... - Nature
    Jul 15, 2024 · Therefore, 0.3 cancer/year/100,000 population ng/kg bw/day for HBsAg-positive individuals and 0.01 cancer/year/100,000 population ng/kg bw ...
  99. [99]
    Human aflatoxicosis in developing countries: a review of toxicology ...
    The prevalence and level of human exposure to aflatoxins on a global scale have been reviewed, and the resulting conclusion was that ≈4.5 billion persons living ...
  100. [100]
    Synergistic Interaction Between Aflatoxin and Hepatitis B Virus in ...
    A synergistic interaction between AFB1 exposure and chronic HBV infection in causing HCC was evident in each of the five studies - odds ratios ranged from 40.7 ...
  101. [101]
    Synergistic interaction between aflatoxin B1 and hepatitis B virus in ...
    Nov 27, 2003 · A dose–response relationship between urinary AFB1 metabolites and risk of HCC was seen in HBV carriers in Taiwan. Comparing high and low urinary ...
  102. [102]
    Synergistic interaction between aflatoxin B1 and hepatitis B virus in ...
    Nuclear excision repair, which is normally responsible for removing AFB1-DNA adducts, is inhibited by HBV x protein, favouring the persistence of existing ...
  103. [103]
    Environmental Factors and Risk for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
    There is strong evidence that co-infection with HBV and HCV exerts a synergistic effect on risk for HCC in both low- and high-risk populations. In a meta ...
  104. [104]
    The Gambia Liver Cancer Study: Infection with hepatitis B and C and ...
    Jan 5, 2004 · Previous data from the Gambia Hepatitis Intervention Study has established a 93% efficacy of childhood vaccination in preventing chronic HBV ...
  105. [105]
    Current Developments of Analytical Methodologies for Aflatoxins ...
    This review aims to provide a clear overview of the most important analytical development in aflatoxins analysis during the last decade (2013–2022)
  106. [106]
    Aflatoxins in Food and Feed: An Overview on Prevalence, Detection ...
    There are various chromatographic and sensor-based methods used for the detection of aflatoxins. The current review provides insight into the sources of ...
  107. [107]
    Comparison of ELISA, HPLC-FLD and HPLC-MS/MS Methods for ...
    This study represents the first report of an investigation and comparison of ELISA, HPLC-FLD and HPLC-MS/MS methods for determination of AFM1 in naturally ...
  108. [108]
  109. [109]
  110. [110]
    Advances in Aptamer-Based Biosensors for the Detection of ... - NIH
    Aug 22, 2024 · Aptamer-based biosensors have become a new tool for food safety risk assessment and monitoring due to their high affinity, good specificity, and fast response.
  111. [111]
    Determination of Aflatoxins in Botanical Roots by a Modification of ...
    The first collaboratively validated method for AFs and ochratoxin A in botanical roots, AOAC Official MethodSM 2008.02, is applicable to ginseng and ginger (12) ...
  112. [112]
    [PDF] AOAC SMPR® 2021.010 Standard Method Performance ...
    Ochratoxin A, aflatoxin B1, aflatoxin B2, aflatoxin G1, and aflatoxin G2 are required analytes. Testing of other toxins in addition to the required toxins can ...
  113. [113]
    Assessment of aflatoxin exposure using serum and urinary ...
    Based on human and animal studies, AFB1-N7-Gua adduct in urine is considered the most reliable short term biomarker, with a half-life of 7.5 h, for evaluating ...
  114. [114]
    Quantification of Aflatoxin-B 1 - N 7 -Guanine in Human Urine by ...
    Epidemiological studies have identified AFB 1 -DNA adducts as biomarkers of AFB 1 exposure, and predictors of HCC risk in humans (Egner et al., 2006 ...
  115. [115]
    Long Term Stability of Human Aflatoxin B1 Albumin Adducts ...
    Since the half-life of human serum albumin is approximately twenty days, chronic AFB1 exposure leads to the accumulation of albumin adducts up to thirty-fold ...
  116. [116]
    Human aflatoxicosis in developing countries: a review of toxicology ...
    The aflatoxin-albumin adduct is measured in peripheral blood and has a half-life in the body of 30-60 d. Therefore, it is a measure that integrates the exposure ...
  117. [117]
    Molecular Dosimetry of Urinary aflatoxin-N7-guanine and Serum ...
    In this study, levels of molecular dosimetry biomarkers for determining genotoxic damage caused by aflatoxin B1 have been measured in a chronic exposure model ...Missing: AFB1- | Show results with:AFB1-
  118. [118]
    Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Aflatoxin Exposure in Zhuqing ...
    The purpose of the following study was to characterize HCC incidence and mortality, status of dietary aflatoxin exposure, and HBV infection in the high-risk ...Missing: assessment | Show results with:assessment
  119. [119]
    Assessment of the Adverse Health Effects of Aflatoxin Exposure from ...
    Nov 9, 2023 · In China, the risk of HCC caused by aflatoxins was 0.125 cases/100,000 persons/year. However, in Guangdong province, an incidence of 0.359 cases ...
  120. [120]
    Management practices to mitigate aflatoxin contamination in ...
    Jun 17, 2024 · Pre-harvest aflatoxin formation can be decreased by practicing good agronomic techniques such as crop rotation, resistant varieties, pest ...<|separator|>
  121. [121]
    Review Aflatoxin contamination of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.)
    Agronomic practices such as crop rotation, use of resistant varieties, insect control ... irrigation can reduce pre-harvest aflatoxin production.
  122. [122]
    [PDF] THE IMPACT OF GOOD AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES (GAP ...
    Using crop varieties resistant to fungal infection or drought stress minimizes aflatoxin risk (FAO, 2014). Proper irrigation and soil amendments, such as gypsum ...
  123. [123]
    How to minimise aflatoxin production - Grain SA Home
    Use of resistant varieties: The most effective strategy for the control of aflatoxin contamination is the use of resistant varieties. At present, no ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  124. [124]
  125. [125]
    National Peanut Research Laboratory - Publication : USDA ARS
    In year two, aflatoxin concentrations in peanuts were significantly reduced by all formulation treatments with an average reduction of ninety two percent. Each ...
  126. [126]
    Using Atoxigenics to Manage Aflatoxin - Crop Protection Network
    Jan 2, 2025 · Atoxigenics can help reduce aflatoxin accumulation in corn and other at-risk crops, including peanut, cottonseed, and pistachio.
  127. [127]
    Preharvest Control of Aflatoxin | National Agricultural Library - USDA
    <LI> To prevent aflatoxin contamination of cultivated croops by introducing into field environments suitable competing microorganisms having the ability to ...
  128. [128]
    Biocontrol efficacy of atoxigenic Aspergillus flavus strains against ...
    In this study, significant aflatoxin reduction (84.96–99.33%) has been achieved. However, no cases were reported before on utilising them in the field condition ...
  129. [129]
    Post-harvest practices for aflatoxin control: Evidence from Kenya - NIH
    Experimental work has shown that both rapid drying of maize and storage of dry maize in hermetic bags dramatically reduce aflatoxin levels (Kaaya and ...
  130. [130]
    Evaluation of corn drying and storage techniques to mitigate ...
    To avoid fungal development and aflatoxin contamination, the moisture content during drying must be less than 15 % within 10 days (Atungulu et al., 2018). In ...
  131. [131]
    Aflatoxin Reduction in Maize by Industrial-Scale Cleaning Solutions
    May 17, 2020 · Removing damaged and infected grains from the commodity showed a reduction in aflatoxin levels in maize between 40–80% [25]. In addition, ...
  132. [132]
    Spectral kernel sorting based on high-risk visual features associated ...
    After sorting, samples showed a significant aflatoxin reduction (p < 0.001, 73/76 samples reduced, mean reduction 31 ppb, range −9.7 – 67 ppb); all samples ...
  133. [133]
    Evaluation of reduction of aflatoxins by near infrared spectrometric ...
    Aug 5, 2025 · The NIR spectrometric sorting clearly showed that AFs could be effectively decreased to levels of < 10 μg/kg even when the lot was highly ...
  134. [134]
    Reducing Aflatoxin in Corn During Harvest and Storage
    Plant stress due to drought, heat or insect damage during fungus growth usually increases aflatoxin levels. Aflatoxin contamination will reduce feeding value ...Suppression of Potential... · Harvest Tips to Reduce Aflatoxin · Dry Properly
  135. [135]
    Hermetic Bags for the Storage of Maize: Perspectives on Economics ...
    Jan 27, 2022 · Besides the reduction in insect activity, the hermetic bags can also reduce the growth of fungi and the production of aflatoxin, especially when ...Introduction · Methods and Data · Results · Discussion
  136. [136]
    Impact of opening hermetic storage bags on grain quality, fungal ...
    The results indicate that repeatedly breaking the hermetic seal of the PICS bags will increase fungal growth and the risk of aflatoxin contamination.
  137. [137]
    Decontamination of Aflatoxin B1 | IntechOpen
    Treatment with either NH4OH at high temperature or gaseous NH3 can effectively reduce aflatoxin B1 content sometimes reaching above 99%.
  138. [138]
    Approaches to Inactivating Aflatoxins—A Review and Challenges
    It was demonstrated that ozonation could efficiently reduce the grain's surface contamination with microorganisms, insects, and mycotoxins; yet, long treatment ...
  139. [139]
    Use of ozone in detoxification of aflatoxin B1 in red pepper
    Many physical and chemical methods such as microwave heating, treatments with ozone (ozonation) or ammonia have been recommended for detoxification of aflatoxin ...
  140. [140]
    Physical and Chemical Methods for Reduction in Aflatoxin Content ...
    The application of higher drying temperature for a longer time decreases both infection and toxin content. Similar degradation ratios were observed during dry ...
  141. [141]
    Emerging Strategies for Aflatoxin Resistance in Peanuts via ...
    Aug 6, 2025 · This review highlights recent advances in peanut aflatoxin resistance research, emphasizing susceptibility gene targeting and genome editing.
  142. [142]
    (PDF) Emerging Strategies for Aflatoxin Resistance in Peanuts via ...
    Sep 12, 2025 · This review highlights recent advances in peanut aflatoxin resistance research, emphasizing susceptibility gene targeting and genome editing.
  143. [143]
    Aflatoxin B1 Degradation by Ery4 Laccase: From In Vitro to ...
    Apr 27, 2023 · Although the enzymatic degradation has been proven to be an effective method for mycotoxins reduction in feed, its application in food still has ...
  144. [144]
    The High-Efficiency Degradation of Multiple Mycotoxins by Lac-W ...
    Nov 4, 2024 · Our previous study showed that Lac-W degrades six mycotoxins with varied degradation rates, including AFB1 (88%), ZEN (60%), DON (34%), T-2 ...
  145. [145]
    Degradation of Aflatoxin B1 by recombinant laccase extracellular ...
    Oct 1, 2022 · Compared with the traditional physical and chemical methods, bioenzymatic degradation of AFB1 is a more promising strategy because it provides a ...
  146. [146]
    Saccharomyces cerevisiae Cell Wall-Based Adsorbent Reduces ...
    The results showed the potential of YCW in reducing the absorption of AFB1 in vivo, and in protecting against the damaging effects of AFB1 contamination.
  147. [147]
    The Binding Efficiency and Interaction of Lactobacillus casei Shirota ...
    This research was conducted to assess the ability of Lactobacillus casei Shirota (Lcs) to bind AFB1 at different concentrations and to determine AFB1 binding ...<|separator|>
  148. [148]
    (PDF) Efficacy of bentonite clay in ameliorating aflatoxicosis in ...
    Aug 6, 2025 · Aflatoxin binders, like aluminum silicate, can lessen the negative effects of aflatoxins by preventing their absorption by attaching toxins ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  149. [149]
    Aflatoxin Detoxification Using Microorganisms and Enzymes - PMC
    Jan 9, 2021 · Although adsorbent products can reduce the bioavailability of mycotoxins, in practice, the toxins cannot be completely adsorbed [34]. In ...
  150. [150]
    Omics Approaches to Aflatoxin Contaminations in the Agri-Food ...
    Sep 30, 2025 · Epigenomics insights into histone modifications and DNA methylation offer novel strategies for regulating toxin production. Transcriptomics and ...2. The Afs Challenge In The... · 4. Omics Technologies... · 4.3. Epigenomics Approach
  151. [151]
    [PDF] Aflatoxins - IARC Publications
    taken into account in the present evaluation. 1. Exposure Data. 1.1 Chemical and physical data. 1.1.1 Synonyms, structural and molecular data.
  152. [152]
    [PDF] Codex general standard for contaminants and toxins in food and feed
    Information about the source of the contaminant and the way in which the food and feed is contaminated, possibly including information, if available, about ...
  153. [153]
    [PDF] Aflatoxin Standards for Food - Aflasafe
    The Codex specifies a maximum limit of 15 micrograms per kilogram, which is 15 parts per billion (15 µg/kg = 15 ppb) for total aflatoxins (sum of AFB1, AFB2, ...
  154. [154]
    [PDF] Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 555.400 Aflatoxins in Human Food
    Jun 1, 2021 · FDA may consider human food containing total aflatoxins greater than 20 micrograms per kilogram (mcg/kg) or parts per billion (ppb) to be ...
  155. [155]
    Aflatoxins - European Commission's Food Safety
    Maximum levels of aflatoxins (aflatoxins B1, B2, G1, G2 and M1) are laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006.
  156. [156]
    The Challenge of Global Aflatoxins Legislation with a Focus on ...
    Aug 3, 2022 · A systematic review, was performed to elucidate the rationale applied in establishing aflatoxin standards and evaluate the economic impacts of these.Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
  157. [157]
    The aflatoxin situation in Africa: Systematic literature review - Meijer
    Mar 7, 2021 · All studies indicated a mean AFB1 level in maize of > 5 µg/kg, which is the legal limit for AFB1 in maize prior to being sorted, according to EU ...3 Results · 3.2 Disease Burden · 3.4 Mitigation Measures
  158. [158]
    Mycotoxin Regulatory Status in Africa: A Decade of Weak ...
    Jun 29, 2022 · Food safety problems are a major hindrance to achieving food security, trade, and healthy living in Africa. Fungi and their secondary ...
  159. [159]
    The impacts of aflatoxin standards on health and nutrition in sub ...
    In this paper we summarize current standards in sub-Saharan Africa related to aflatoxins, a priority hazard, and discuss their coherence and evidence-base.
  160. [160]
    [PDF] Aflatoxin management in Sub-Saharan Africa - INNSpub
    Oct 3, 2024 · Challenges arise due to the complexity of contamination and inconsistent adoption by smallholder farmers. There is a need to combine different ...
  161. [161]
    Global Trade and Food Safety: Winners and Losers in a Fragmented ...
    The total loss of export revenue for the 9 African countries in the study is estimated to be US $400 under EU standards, compared to a gain of US $670 million ...
  162. [162]
    Unveiling the Hidden Threat of Aflatoxins: Occurrence, Biochemical ...
    African exporters are estimated to lose $670 million in trade each year due to the EU's strict regulations, which are set at 2 μg/kg for AFB1 and 4 μg/kg for ...<|separator|>
  163. [163]
    Aflatoxin Contamination in Agri‐Food Systems - PubMed Central - NIH
    Economically, AFs lead to an estimated USD 6–18 billion in annual losses due to trade rejections, healthcare costs, and productivity decline. This review also ...
  164. [164]
    Peanut Trade and Aflatoxin Standards in Europe: Economic Effects ...
    Aug 7, 2025 · This paper evaluates the economic implications of strict peanut aflatoxin regulation in Europe focusing on price and quantity effects of the ...
  165. [165]
    Indonesia suspends Indian groundnut imports for higher aflatoxin ...
    Aug 29, 2025 · Indonesia suspends Indian groundnut imports due to high aflatoxin levels, impacting $274 million annual trade.
  166. [166]
    Introducing an aflatoxin-safe labeling program in complex food ...
    This study uses a discrete choice experiment approach to assess if traders are willing to pay a price premium for aflatoxin-safe maize.Missing: schemes | Show results with:schemes
  167. [167]
    Demand for Aflatoxin‐Safe Maize in Kenya: Dynamic Response to ...
    Apr 16, 2020 · In developed markets, private standards and certification schemes are typically promoted by the standard-setting or certifying body. In ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  168. [168]
    Introducing an aflatoxin-safe labeling program in complex food ...
    Aug 9, 2025 · This study uses a discrete choice experiment approach to assess if traders are willing to pay a price premium for aflatoxin-safe maize and ...
  169. [169]
    Economic benefit of co-regulation to manage aflatoxin risk in maize
    Jul 13, 2023 · This study provides a more realistic characterization of cost drivers associated with aflatoxin risk management and counters exaggerated economic losses.
  170. [170]
    Global health and economic impacts of mycotoxins
    Jul 17, 2025 · Aflatoxins are present in peanuts, tree nuts, and dried figs, while ochratoxin A is found in dried fruits. To estimate governmental costs ...
  171. [171]
    Global Burden of Aflatoxin-Induced Hepatocellular Carcinoma
    Of the 550,000–600,000 new HCC cases worldwide each year, about 25,200–155,000 may be attributable to aflatoxin exposure. Most cases occur in sub-Saharan Africa ...Missing: treatment | Show results with:treatment
  172. [172]
    A systematic review with meta-analysis of the relation of aflatoxin B1 ...
    Dec 5, 2023 · This meta-analysis highlighted the importance of AFB1 exposure as a potential risk factor for growth impairment in infants/children.
  173. [173]
    Estimating the health burden of aflatoxin attributable stunting among ...
    Jan 15, 2021 · Numerous population-based studies have documented high prevalence of aflatoxin associated childhood stunting in low income countries.
  174. [174]
    Retrospective and Prospective Look at Aflatoxin Research and ...
    The first acute toxicity of aflatoxins causing liver failure was reported in 1967 in Uganda following the death of a teenager who had been regularly eating ...<|separator|>
  175. [175]
    The problem of aflatoxic human disease in parts of India ... - PubMed
    Analysis of food samples revealed that the disease outbreak was due to the consumption of maize (corn) heavily infested with the fungus Aspergillus flavus.
  176. [176]
    Outbreaks of Aflatoxicoses in India - ResearchGate
    Aug 7, 2025 · One of the first outbreaks of aflatoxicosis was reported from western India during 1974 with 106 deaths of indigenous people whose staple food ...
  177. [177]
    A chronological summary of class I and II pet food recalls involving...
    ... In the US, almost all mycotoxin outbreaks in pets are due to high levels of aflatoxin in dry pet food. The outbreak in 1998 resulted in the death of 25 dogs ...
  178. [178]
    Outbreak of Aflatoxin Poisoning --- Eastern and Central Provinces ...
    Sep 3, 2004 · An outbreak of acute aflatoxicosis (20 cases; CFR = 60%) was reported previously in Makueni district, Eastern Province, Kenya, in 1981 (1).
  179. [179]
    Outbreak of an Acute Aflatoxicosis in Kenya in 2004 - PubMed Central
    A total of 317 cases were reported by 20 July 2004, with a case fatality rate of 39% (1, 26). This epidemic resulted from ingestion of contaminated maize (22).
  180. [180]
    Multi-Mycotoxin Contamination in Serbian Maize During 2021–2023
    May 4, 2025 · Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) was the most concerning contaminant, with 73.2% of the samples in 2022 exceeding the European regulatory limit for human ...Missing: spikes | Show results with:spikes
  181. [181]
    Aflatoxins in Maize from Serbia and Croatia: Implications of Climate ...
    The main aim of this study was to estimate the influence of weather on AFs occurrence in maize from Serbia and Croatia in the 2018–2021 period.Missing: spikes | Show results with:spikes
  182. [182]
    Prediction of aflatoxin contamination outbreaks in Texas corn using ...
    The objective of our research is to predict aflatoxin outbreaks in Texas-grown maize using dynamic geospatial data from remote sensing satellites, soil ...
  183. [183]
    Aflatoxin risk in the era of climatic change-a comprehensive review
    Nov 9, 2024 · Aflatoxin contamination is increasing in continental regions in the middle latitudes (40°–55° North) because of global warming and rising ...
  184. [184]
    Prioritization of Mycotoxins Based on Their Genotoxic Potential with ...
    The well-known AFB1, produced by the Aspergillus species, has been consistently found to be genotoxic and is considered a human carcinogen via DNA adduct ...
  185. [185]
    Mass Spectrometry-Based Method to Measure Aflatoxin B1 DNA ...
    Mar 18, 2024 · The cationic AFB1–N7-Gua undergoes rapid deglycosylation from rodent liver DNA, whereas the ring-opened AFB1–FapyGua adduct is more persistent.
  186. [186]
    Effects of Intermittent Exposure to Aflatoxin B 1 on DNA and RNA ...
    Our data indicate that DNA and RNA adducts increased linearly, from 0.01 ppm to 1.6 ppm of AFB1 after 12 and 20 weeks of intermittent treatment. A linear dose ...
  187. [187]
    Nucleotide excision repair of aflatoxin-induced DNA damage within ...
    Sep 11, 2024 · We further analyzed the distribution of nucleotide excision repair sites for AFB1-induced DNA adducts within the 3D human genome organization.<|separator|>
  188. [188]
    Risk assessment of carcinogenic potential based on the current ...
    Even for DNA reactive substances, such as aflatoxin, a virtually negligible risk exposure level can be established. ... Although for DNA reactive substances, such ...Commentary · 2. Human Relevance Of Rodent... · Transparency Document
  189. [189]
    Thresholds of Genotoxic and Non-Genotoxic Carcinogens - PMC
    Non-genotoxic carcinogens like as other toxic chemicals have threshold while genotoxic carcinogens have no threshold. Non-genotoxic carcinogens can be used in ...
  190. [190]
    Aflatoxin B1 DNA-Adducts in Hepatocellular Carcinoma from a Low ...
    Apr 15, 2022 · It is thus conceivable that chronic/intermittent, low-dose AFB1 consumption with food and beverages might also occur in geographical areas ...
  191. [191]
    Threshold of Toxicological Concern - Food Packaging Forum
    Aug 14, 2013 · Based on the de minimis principle, this rule exempts substances migrating from packaging into food at levels below a threshold of 0.5 ppb from ...1. Introduction · 2. Scientific And Historical... · 4. Discussion
  192. [192]
    Aflatoxins in the rice production chain: A review on prevalence ...
    Setting regulatory limits for highly toxic compounds like AFs adheres to the “As Lowest As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA) principle.Missing: critique | Show results with:critique
  193. [193]
    Worldwide aflatoxin contamination of agricultural products and foods ...
    May 11, 2021 · Aflatoxins are ubiquitous and occur in various food crops, including cereals, nuts, dairy products, among other food and agricultural products.
  194. [194]
    Iraq's Biological Weapons: The Past as Future? - JAMA Network
    Aug 6, 1997 · Between 1985 and April 1991, Iraq developed anthrax, botulinum toxin, and aflatoxin for biological warfare; 200 bombs and 25 ballistic ...
  195. [195]
    Biological Warfare Investigation: Oct. 23, 2000 - Health.mil
    Whatever the case, Iraq's aflatoxin-based weapons had little military utility.[134]. The classic example of the perceived short-term and long-term negligible ...
  196. [196]
    Mycotoxins: a new concern for biosecurity? | Biomedicine & Prevention
    Considerable evidence suggests that Iraqi scientists developed aflatoxins as part of their bioweapons program starting from 1974 and during all 1980s.