2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.12.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Free and hidden fumonisins in Brazilian raw maize samples

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
11
1
4

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 35 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
3
11
1
4
Order By: Relevance
“…When compared to total FB 1 levels (free FB 1 + matrix-associated FB 1 ), the amounts of matrix-associated FB 1 accounted for 26% in silage D and 40% in silages B and C. Similarly, in 2013 harvest mini-silos, matrix-associated FB 1 forms reached between 5% and 30% ( Table 2). These results were similar to previous reports 41,61 addressing whole plant maize silages and raw maize. In addition, the ratios of matrix-associated FB 1 to free FB 1 determined in 2011 and 2013 silages varied from 0.05 to 0.7 in contaminated non-fermented maize grains and never reached values higher than 1 as observed by Bryła et al 59 Indeed, the matrix-associated to free FB 1 ratios determined by the former authors in different maize based-food products including noodles, corn flakes and maize snacks ranged between 1.47 and 5.95.…”
Section: Matrix-associated Fb 1 Evolution In Hmmg Silagesupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…When compared to total FB 1 levels (free FB 1 + matrix-associated FB 1 ), the amounts of matrix-associated FB 1 accounted for 26% in silage D and 40% in silages B and C. Similarly, in 2013 harvest mini-silos, matrix-associated FB 1 forms reached between 5% and 30% ( Table 2). These results were similar to previous reports 41,61 addressing whole plant maize silages and raw maize. In addition, the ratios of matrix-associated FB 1 to free FB 1 determined in 2011 and 2013 silages varied from 0.05 to 0.7 in contaminated non-fermented maize grains and never reached values higher than 1 as observed by Bryła et al 59 Indeed, the matrix-associated to free FB 1 ratios determined by the former authors in different maize based-food products including noodles, corn flakes and maize snacks ranged between 1.47 and 5.95.…”
Section: Matrix-associated Fb 1 Evolution In Hmmg Silagesupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Procedures based on an alkaline hydrolysis step have been proposed by several authors to estimate matrix‐associated FB 1 forms . According to Bryła et al , this alkaline hydrolysis produces a disruption of the primary and secondary structure of maize macromolecules involved in the toxin complexation and the release of the sequestered toxin, together with a cleavage of the FB 1 side chains and elimination of carboxylic groups that are potential sites of covalent modification.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hidden FB have been alleged to occur in processed products especially nixtamalised and thermally processed foods [52,53]. However, recent studies have revealed the occurrence of these toxins in unprocessed food products especially in raw maize samples [20,54] which suggest the possible transformation of FB to bound derivatives by natural phenomena due to plant metabolism [24]. The presence of hidden FB as observed in the current study may pose an additional health risk to consumers especially to the consumers of ogi analysed in this study.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies on the occurrence of Fusarium mycotoxins in cereals and cereal-based products have reported the natural occurrence and co-occurrence of modified mycotoxins such as DON-3-glucoside (DON-3G), ZEN-4-glucoside (ZEN-14G), and α- and β-zearalenol-4-glucoside (α- and β-ZEL-4G) [5,19]. The possible underestimation of FB concentration in cereals and cereal-based products as a result of presences of hidden FB has been demonstrated [20,21,22]. Hidden FB cannot be directly analysed as they have to be released from the matrix into extractable form (hydrolysed FB) by sample treatment often by alkaline hydrolysis [23,24].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2). A dose de inclusão de aditivo antimicotoxinas (AAM) foi calculada proporcionalmente ao nível de concentração micotoxicológica de cada híbrido após o ajuste das FUM para fumonisinas totais, que são a soma das fumonisinas livres (FUM) e das fumonisinas ocultas, conforme a equação proposta por Oliveira et al (2015): fumonisinas totais (mg/kg) = (0,8583+0,5615*FUM) 2 . Em seguida, a dose de AAM foi calculada na proporção de 2,5kg de AAM/t de ração para cada 10.000µg/kg de fumonisinas totais, acrescida da proporção de 2,5kg de AAM/t de ração para cada 28µg/kg de AFLA.…”
Section: Methodsunclassified