Impact of Enniatin and Deoxynivalenol Co-Occurrence on Plant, Microbial, Insect, Animal and Human Systems: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives

Valenti, Irene; Tini, Francesco; Sevarika, Milos; Agazzi, Alessandro; Beccari, Giovanni; Bellezza, Ilaria; Ederli, Luisa; Grottelli, Silvia; Pasquali, Matias; Romani, Roberto; Saracchi, M.; Covarelli, Lorenzo

doi:10.3390/toxins15040271

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 187 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The significance of DON was initially demonstrated by generating and studying a trichothecene non-producing mutant strain, with several subsequent studies reinforcing these findings [ 32 ]. In contrast, despite their frequent occurrence, little is known about other Fusarium secondary metabolites such as ENNs [ 80 ]. For this reason, in the present study, the role of ENNs in F. avenaceum virulence was investigated on three different common wheat tissues and compared to that of DON in F. graminearum .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between the role of enniatins and deoxynivalenol in Fusarium virulence on different tissues of common wheat

Beccari,

Tini,

Foroud

et al. 2024

BMC Plant Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Fusarium graminearum and Fusarium avenaceum are two of the most important causal agents of Fusarium head blight (FHB) of wheat. They can produce mycotoxins that accumulate in infected wheat heads, including deoxynivalenol (DON) and enniatins (ENNs), produced by F. graminearum and F. avenaceum, respectively. While the role of DON as a virulence factor in F. graminearum toward wheat is well known, ENNs in F. avenaceum has been poorly explored. Results obtained to-date indicate that ENNs may confer an advantage to F. avenaceum only on particular hosts. Results In this study, with the use of ENN-producing and ENN non-producing F. avenaceum strains, the role of ENNs on F. avenaceum virulence was investigated on the root, stem base and head of common wheat, and compared with the role of DON, using DON-producing and DON non-producing F. graminearum strains. The DON-producing F. graminearum strain showed a significantly higher ability to cause symptoms and colonise each of the tested tissues than the non-producing strain. On the other hand, the ability to produce ENNs increased initial symptoms of the disease and fungal biomass accumulation, measured by qPCR, only in wheat heads, and not in roots or stem bases. LC-MS/MS analysis was used to confirm the presence of ENNs and DON in the different strains, and results, both in vitro and in wheat heads, were consistent with the genetics of each strain. Conclusion While the key role of DON on F. graminearum virulence towards three different wheat tissues was noticeable, ENNs seemed to have a role only in influencing F. avenaceum virulence on common wheat heads probably due to an initial delay in the appearance of symptoms.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison between the role of enniatins and deoxynivalenol in Fusarium virulence on different tissues of common wheat

Beccari,

Tini,

Foroud

et al. 2024

BMC Plant Biol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This suggests that the number of mycotoxins and their concentration is much greater than previously supposed. Valenti et al [ 81 ] reported several papers with the coexistence of DON and enniatins including synergistic, antagonistic, and additive effects. Nicholson et al [ 82 ] reported enniatin synthetase presence with primers Ensyn6065F/Ensyn7229R in nine Fusarium spp., including F. avenaceum , F , chlamydosporum , F. sambucinum , and F. tricinctum , but not in F. graminearum , F. culmorum , F. equiseti , F. poae or F. proliferatum .…”

Section: Multitoxin Presence An Emerging Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Is Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) Resistance and What Are Its Food Safety Risks in Wheat? Problems and Solutions—A Review

Mesterhazy

2024

Toxins

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term “Fusarium Head Blight” (FHB) resistance supposedly covers common resistances to different Fusarium spp. without any generally accepted evidence. For food safety, all should be considered with their toxins, except for deoxynivalenol (DON). Disease index (DI), scabby kernels (FDK), and DON steadily result from FHB, and even the genetic regulation of Fusarium spp. may differ; therefore, multitoxin contamination is common. The resistance types of FHB form a rather complex syndrome that has been the subject of debate for decades. It seems that resistance types are not independent variables but rather a series of components that follow disease and epidemic development; their genetic regulation may differ. Spraying inoculation (Type 1 resistance) includes the phase where spores land on palea and lemma and spread to the ovarium and also includes the spread-inhibiting resistance factor; therefore, it provides the overall resistance that is needed. A significant part of Type 1-resistant QTLs could, therefore, be Type 2, requiring the retesting of the QTLs; this is, at least, the case for the most effective ones. The updated resistance components are as follows: Component 1 is overall resistance, as discussed above; Component 2 includes spreading from the ovarium through the head, which is a part of Component 1; Component 3 includes factors from grain development to ripening (FDK); Component 4 includes factors influencing DON contamination, decrease, overproduction, and relative toxin resistance; and for Component 5, the tolerance has a low significance without new results. Independent QTLs with different functions can be identified for one or more traits. Resistance to different Fusarium spp. seems to be connected; it is species non-specific, but further research is necessary. Their toxin relations are unknown. DI, FDK, and DON should be checked as they serve as the basic data for the risk analysis of cultivars. A better understanding of the multitoxin risk is needed regarding resistance to the main Fusarium spp.; therefore, an updated testing methodology is suggested. This will provide more precise data for research, genetics, and variety registration. In winter and spring wheat, the existing resistance level is very high, close to Sumai 3, and provides much greater food safety combined with sophisticated fungicide preventive control and other practices in commercial production.

show abstract

“…Deoxynivalenol (DON) is a common Fusarium sp.-derived contaminant of feedstuffs for cows [1][2][3]. In particular, maize-originating feedstuffs, such as maize grain and maize silage, are significant sources of exposure for dairy cows [4,5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Estimation of Oral Exposure of Dairy Cows to the Mycotoxin Deoxynivalenol (DON) through Toxin Residues in Blood and Other Physiological Matrices with a Special Focus on Sampling Size for Future Predictions

Dänicke

Kersten

Billenkamp

et al. 2023

Dairy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of dairy cow exposure to DON can generally be managed through analyses of feed or physiological specimens for DON residues. The latter enables a diagnosis not only on an individual basis but also on a herd basis. For this purpose, on the basis of published data, linear regression equations were derived for blood, urine, milk, and bile relating DON residue levels as predictor variables to DON exposure. Amongst the matrices evaluated, blood was identified to reflect the inner exposure to DON most reliably on toxicokinetic backgrounds, which was supported by a linear relationship between DON residues in blood and DON exposure. On the basis of this, and because of extended blood data availability, the derived regressions were validated using internal and external data, demonstrating a reasonable concordance. For all matrices evaluated, the ultimately recommended linear regression equations intercepted the origin and enabled the prediction of the DON exposure to be expected within the prediction intervals. DON exposure (µg/kg body weight/d) can be predicted by multiplying the DON residues (ng/mL) in blood by 2.52, in urine by 0.022, and in milk by 2.47. The span of the prediction intervals varied according to the dispersion of the observations and, thus, also considered apparent outliers that were not removed from the datasets. The reasons were extensively discussed and included toxicokinetic aspects. In addition, the suggestions for sample size estimation for future characterization of the mean exposure level of a given herd size were influenced by expectable variation in the data. It was concluded that more data are required for all specimens to further qualify the preliminary prediction equations.

show abstract

Impact of Enniatin and Deoxynivalenol Co-Occurrence on Plant, Microbial, Insect, Animal and Human Systems: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives

Cited by 6 publications

References 187 publications

A comparison between the role of enniatins and deoxynivalenol in Fusarium virulence on different tissues of common wheat

A comparison between the role of enniatins and deoxynivalenol in Fusarium virulence on different tissues of common wheat

What Is Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) Resistance and What Are Its Food Safety Risks in Wheat? Problems and Solutions—A Review

Estimation of Oral Exposure of Dairy Cows to the Mycotoxin Deoxynivalenol (DON) through Toxin Residues in Blood and Other Physiological Matrices with a Special Focus on Sampling Size for Future Predictions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About