Exposure of pregnant sows to deoxynivalenol during 35–70 days of gestation does not affect pathomorphological and immunohistochemical properties of fetal organs

Abstract

In order to evaluate the influence of deoxynivalenol (DON) on histomorphological and immunohistochemical parameters in the development of porcine fetuses, five pregnant sows were fed a control diet (0.15 mg DON/kg diet) and seven sows a contaminated diet (4.42 mg DON/kg diet) between days 35 and 70 of gestation. On day 70, fetuses were delivered by caesarean section and sows and fetuses were euthanized. Tissue samples of three fetuses from each sow were collected, fixed in formalin, and processed routinely for light microscopy and immunohistochemistry. At necropsy, no macroscopic lesions were observed in any organ of the fetuses. Histomorphological, immunohistochemical, and morphometrical parameters of the immune system, liver, and intestinal tract were examined. The following antibodies were used in the liver, spleen, lymph nodes, thymus, gut, and bone marrow to compare control- and DON-treated animals: (I) CD3 and CD79a (T and B lymphocytes differentiation); (II) myeloid/histiocyte antigen 387 (MAC) (identification of macrophages); (III) Ki-67 Antigen (Ki-67) (proliferation marker); (IV) p-p-38 mitogen-activated protein kinases (p-p38 MAPK) as well as caspase-3 (cas3) and caspase-9 (cas9) (enzymes of apoptosis cascade); (V) tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNFα) (immune-related protein). The results of the study show that exposure of pregnant sows with DON between gestation days 35 and 70 causes no pathomorphologically or immunohistochemically detectable alterations in all fetal organs examined.

Maternal Exposure Results in Long-Term Deoxynivalenol Persistence in Piglets’ Plasma and Modulates the Immune System

“…Intrauterine transfer of DON was clearly documented in the present study, which is in agreement with earlier published data on the passage of DON through the placental barrier [ 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Our earlier published data show that DON was detectable in cord blood samples [ 29 ].…”

“…Significant economic losses in pork production also result from the influence of DON on reproductive performance [ 19 , 20 , 21 ] when the developing fetus is exposed due to pregnant sows ingesting a toxin-contaminated diet [ 22 , 23 ]. However, a subsequent detailed study showed that no pathomorphologically or immunohistochemically detectable alterations occur in fetal organs after intrauterine transfer of DON [ 24 ]. Likewise, other studies showed that the exposure to DON-contaminated feed has either no or only a limited impact on pigs.…”

The Influence of Fusarium Mycotoxins on the Liver of Gilts and Their Suckling Piglets

“…As DON has also been associated with antiproliferative activity [ 50 ], we assessed the proliferation activity by determining the number of Ki-67-positive hepatocytes, but found no significant differences, neither in the liver of gilts nor their piglets. The same was observed in the liver of porcine fetuses when pregnant sows were exposed to DON and ZEN for 35 days during pregnancy [ 40 ], whereas an increased proliferation index was observed when piglets received feed mono-contaminated with FBs (6 mg per kg of feed) or DON (3 mg per kg of feed) and especially when co-contaminated with both FBs and DON [ 14 ].…”

“…Some studies have shown no changes in liver morphology when DON was either the sole potential toxic factor or in combination with another mycotoxin [ 30 , 31 , 40 , 42 , 43 ], but that was not the case in all studies. When piglets received diets either mono-contaminated with DON (1.5 mg per kg of feed) or multi-contaminated with DON (2 or 3 mg per kg of feed), ZEN (1.5 mg per kg of feed), and NIV (1.3 mg per kg of feed), the most prominent histopathological features were disorganization of hepatic cords, cytoplasmic vacuolization of hepatocytes, and megalocytosis.…”

“…Since Fusarium mycotoxins are such a common contaminant and clearly have effects on different animal species, it is also of interest whether they have detrimental effects on the offspring. Some studies have analyzed the transfer of single or multiple Fusarium mycotoxins from sows to their offspring, implying that these can cause indirect effects via a decreased feed intake and via direct effects of diaplacentar transfer of ingested mycotoxins to the developing fetuses [ 20 , 21 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 39 , 40 ].…”