Prerpints.org logo
Preprint
Article

A Survey of Natural, Mycological, and AFB1 Contamination in Wheat and Maize during the 2022 Harvesting Season in Albania

Altmetrics

Downloads

168

Views

119

Comments

0

A peer-reviewed article of this preprint also exists.

Submitted:

13 October 2023

Posted:

13 October 2023

Read the latest preprint version here

Alerts
Abstract
(1) Background: Nowadays, food safety is paramount in human health, with mycotoxin as one of the most important contaminants to contaminate foodstuffs. Aflatoxins are potent food contaminants present in maize and wheat. Invasion of toxigenic fungi in the field and storage stage is directly affected by climate and further environmental factors; (2) Methods: Mycological contamination of maize and grain harvested in 2022 was surveyed in 129 samples. Aflatoxin B1 contamination was investigated employing the Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent assay method; (3) Results: Our findings reveal the presence of fungi from five genera, Aspergillus, Fusarium, Penicillium, Alternaria, and Cladosporium, with maize was more frequently contaminated compared to wheat commodity. Penicillium genera were the most abundant, 77.89%, followed by Fusarium (74.73%) and Aspergillus (72.63%). The samples originating from the Korça region (104 units) resulted in a higher fungal load on the three genera; (4) Conclusions: AFB1 contamination in maize was more critical versus wheat. The AFB1 incidence in maize was 88.23%, with a maximum of 69.12 mg/kg, and in wheat was 4.91%. Compared to EU MRL, no wheat sample was found above (2 g/kg), while the situation with maize commodity is considered more serious, with 41.18% exceeding the AFB1 MRL (5 g/kg) as well as feed MRL 32.25%. Our findings and other reports from the last decade suggest that information and disseminating good agriculture practices to the farmers must be in focus.
Keywords: 
Subject: Biology and Life Sciences  -   Food Science and Technology

1. Introduction

Trade globalization has highlighted the importance—for both human and animal health—of safety issues relating to food and feed products [1]. The monitoring of food contaminants and the implementation of safety standards are essential tasks which are now carried out worldwide. However, differences between developed and developing countries with regard to food safety indicate that consumers in developing countries face a greater risk of exposure to food contaminants [2,3]. Among food contaminants, mycotoxins are considered especially important. Natural secondary metabolites produced by certain fungi widely affect food and feed commodities. The most frequently detected mycotoxins are aflatoxins (AFs), ochratoxin A (OTA), zearalenone (ZEN), fumonisins (FBs), and deoxynivalenol (DON). The primary mycotoxin-producing fungi belong to the Aspergillus, Fusarium, and Penicillium genera [4].
Among the hundreds of identified mycotoxins, aflatoxins are a family of compounds structurally related to the substituted difuranocoumarins [5]. In the past, when aflatxins were found only in tropical regions with high levels of temperature and humidity, they represented a threat to food safety at a regional level only; however, because of trade globalization, aflatoxin contamination is today a global health problem which affects food commodities consumed by both humans and animals [6,7,8]. According to the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed, between 2011 and 2021, aflatoxins were involved in 95% of notifications and border rejections [9]. Out of a total of 20 aflatoxins so far described, B1 (AFB1), B2 (AFB2), G1 (AFG1), and G2 (AFG2) are known to be the most potent toxic compounds, and thus pose the most serious threat to health [10]. The main aflatoxigenic-producing species, Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus, are found in primary host cultures of rice, peanuts (groundnuts), oilseeds, wheat, rice, soybeans, cotton, and wheat; as a result, both species are prevalent in tropical and subtropical regions [11]. However, these species are also known to contaminate milk, cheese, and other dairy products [12]. Environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, storage conditions, water activity, concurrent mycobiota, and physical damage all affect the degree to which mycotoxin contamination affects grain commodities [13,14].
Fungal contamination can occur from pre- to post-harvest stages. In stored grain, the incidence and prevalence of mycotoxigenic fungi is influenced by the type and condition of the grain involved, as well as environmental and biological factors. Temperature and water activity (aw) are the main environmental factors influencing levels of fungi and mycotoxins in stored grain [15]. In maize, strategies for preventing mycotoxin contamination in food- and feed-chains are based on applying the hazard analysis and critical control points (HACCP) approach [16]. Aflatoxin mitigation in the post-harvest stage includes physical methods such as sorting, dehulling, steeping, wet milling, dry milling, heat treatment, and irradiation; chemical methods are based on intervention with chemical agents, e.g., adsorbents, acids, and bases; microbiological methods involve intervention with microbiological agents; finally, genetic engineering methods are based on the regulation mechanism of AF biosynthesis in A. flavus [7,17].
Aflatoxins are potent liver toxins, immunosuppressants, carcinogens, and mutagens, and they can cause serious public health problems [18]. The World Health Organization (WHO) has classified AFB1 as a Group 1 carcinogenic toxin that can cause human hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, aflatoxin accumulation has also been reported in vital organs such as the kidney, lung, heart, and brain [11,19,20]. The aflatoxins exhibit different strengths of toxicity, carcinogenicity, and mutagenicity, according to the order B1 > G1 > B2 > G2, indicating the importance of chemical-structure specificity to AFB1 and AFG1 [10,21].
The security of staple commodities is expected to be impacted by climate change. Increases in global CO2 emissions, temperatures, and drought episodes in different regions of Europe have affected crop yields and levels of aflatoxin contamination [22]. In this regard, the Mediterranean basin is expected to be impacted especially seriously, with likely negative effects on food production and an increased risk of AF contamination, especially in maize [23].
Grain cultivation has long been one of the most important agricultural activities in Albania, especially the production of maize (Zea mays L.) and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). When the communist system collapsed in the 1990s, the administration of arable land underwent a drastic process of change [24]. During this period, state cooperative farms which were capable of implementing good agricultural practices and ensuring food safety on arable land were replaced by smaller family farms. This period was characterized by a decrease in agricultural rentability and an increased level of concern with respect to emerging contaminants in the food-production process. In this study, we sought to investigate the extent of mycotoxin contamination in maize and wheat produced in Albania.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sample collection

Maize (68) and grain (61) samples were collected during the 2022 harvest period from farms in different regions of Albania: Durrësi, Elbasan, Fieri, Kavaja, and Korça. The first four of these regions are situated in the western part of the country along the Adriatic Sea, and are characterized by a typical Mediterranean climate. In contrast, a typical continental climate characterizes the Korça region, which is located in the eastern part of Albania at a high altitude of 850 m above sea level. Sampling procedures were applied according to EU regulation 2023/915 and submitted to the Laboratory of Toxic Substances and Biomolecules of the Department of Chemistry, in the Faculty of Natural Sciences (FNS). Samples were kept in the dark, under low-humidity, cold-temperature (4oC) conditions until mycological and analytical analysis was finalized.

2.2. Mycological analysis

Isolation and identification of molds and yeast was carried out by applying the Verband Deutscher Landëirtschaftlicher Untersuchungs- und Forschungsanstalten (VDLUFA) procedures [25]. A 20 g quantity of ground sample was added to 180 ml of peptone/water (0.5%). After homogenization, the mixture was diluted to final concentrations of 10-2, 10-3, and 10-4. Aliquots of 1 ml from each dilution were then spread on parallel plates on a solid medium surface composed of deionized water (1000 mL), malt extract (40 g), agar (12 g), yeast extract (2 g), glucose (2 g), Marlophen 810 (1 mL), oxytetracycline (60 mg), and Bengal rose (60 mg). Inoculated Petri dishes were incubated for three days at 25oC, placed in a dark and standard atmosphere, and stored at room temperature for another 2–3 days. Finally, colonies were counted, and the results were expressed as a mean of the colony-forming unit in thousands per gram of sample (103 CFU/g) using the following formula:
N=(∑▒C)/(V×n×d)
where N = number of colony-forming units per gram of sample (CFU/g); ΣC = sum of all colonies of the count plate; V = volume of the dilution pipetted in the count plate in mL; n = number of count plates that could be evaluated; and d = dilution factor.
Identification of taxonomic fungal genera was achieved visually, employing a magnifying glass where applicable. The closest characterizations was obtained using an optical microscope [25].

2.3. Aflatoxin B1 analysis

A grain amount of 1000 g was milled using Laboratory Mill (Perten Lab Mill 120); an additional 100 g of flour was then taken, placed in a plastic jar, and stored in a dark and dry place at a temperature of 4oC. The preparation of wheat and maize samples, and the determination of AFB1 using the ELISA method, were both carried out according to manufacturer’s instructions.
The ELISA screening method for aflatoxin B1 was conducted using AFB1 test kits (Catalogue Reference #: 1060-09, PerkinElmer, MA, USA) according to the described procedure. In brief, 5 g of milled sample was introduced into a 50 mL test tube, to which 25 ml of 70% EtOH was added. The mixture was shaken for 20 min at room temperature. The solution was then centrifuged at 2000 g/min per 10 min. Finally, 1 mL of the obtained supernatant was diluted with 1 ml of ultrapure water. For the test assay, 50μL of diluted supernatant was passed into the well.
The parameters were validated using the official European procedures for immuno-enzymatic orientation methods. All values were calculated and expressed in line with the recommendations set out in European Commission Decision 2002/657 [26]. The method was validated using reference material from the SIGMA company (no. 0476983-7).

2.3.1. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) procedure

Microtiter wells were inserted into the microwell holder in sufficient numbers for all standards and specimens. Next, 50 μL amounts of AFB1 standard solution were added in duplicate to different wells, from lowest to highest levels of concentration. Fifty microliters of samples were dispersed in duplicate into different wells. Next, 100 μL of antibody #1 was added to each well, and the solutions were gently manually mixed on the plate for 1 min. The cells were then incubated for 30 minutes at room temperature (20–25ºC) in the dark. Next, the plate was washed three times with 250 μL of 1 wash solution. The plate was then inverted and gently dried. In the next stage, a solution containing 150 μL of antibody #2 was dispersed into each well, followed by incubation at room temperature for 30 min in the dark. A cover was used for the microtiter plate in this step. After incubation, the plate was washed three times with the washing solution, as described for the first washing procedure. Following this, 100 μL of the tetramethylbenzidine substrate was added and incubated at 20oC for 15 min. Finally, 100 μL of stop buffer (1 N H2SO4) was added to each well and mixed to terminate the enzyme reaction. The absorbance was measured at 450 nm using a TECAN reader (Infinite 200 Pro, Nanoquant, Austria).

2.3.2. AFB1 quantification

The results were evaluated using the MagellanTM computer program developed by TECAN, which is compatible with the Infinite 200 Pro microplate reader. The values plotted on the calibration curve were multiplied by a dilution factor of 10. Following manufacturer's instructions, the LOD for the milk matrix was 0.005 μg kg-1. The analytical quality of ELISA was confirmed using the certified reference material Sigma Aldrich nr. 0476983-7. The validation parameters were calculated and expressed in line with Commission Regulation (EC) No 401/2006 for screening methods [27].

3. Results

3.1. Mycological contamination

Fungal growth and mycotoxin synthesis result from the complex interactions of environmental and biological factors in pre-and post-harvest periods. In the pre-harvest phase, the main determining factors are high temperatures, water stresses, and insect damage; in the post-harvest phase, temperature and water activity are the main determining factors [15,17].
Table 1. The mycological contamination of wheat and maize samples.
Table 1. The mycological contamination of wheat and maize samples.
Wheat Maize Total
Number of samples 61 68 129
Microorganism Incidence (percent., %)a
Mean/medianb
Max. level (x 103 cfu/g)c 		Incidence (percent., %)
Mean/median
Max. level (x 103 cfu/g)		 Incidenced (percentage, %)
Aspergillus 43 (70.5%)
7.43/2.00
34.00		 52 (76.5%)
464.2/220.0
1750.0		 95 (72.63%)
Penicillium 43 (70.5%)
50.83/6.50
240.00		 62 (91.2%)
1078.38/475.0
5000.0		 105 (77.89%)
Fusarium 43 (70.5%)
9.79/1.00
60.00		 56 (82.4%)
363.32/100.0
1000.0		 99 (74.73%)
Alternaria 12 (19.7%)
0.75/0.75
1.00		 2 (2.90%)
100/100
100		 14 (13.68%)
Cladosporium 12 (19.7%)
0.75/0.75
1.00		 2 (2.90%)
3.50/3.50
3.50		 14 (13.68%)
Yeast 12 (19.7%)
1.00/1.00
1.00		 26 (38.2%)
14.2/20.0
20.0		 38 (26.31%)
a Number of positive samples. b Arithmetic mean/median of positive samples (x 103 cfu/g). c Maximum level detected (x 103 cfu/g). d Total number of positive samples referring to a specific genera.
Our results indicate that collected wheat and maize samples manifested molds belonging to the genera Aspergillus, Fusarium, Penicillium, Alternaria, and Cladosporium. The presence of yeast was also evident. The studied samples indicated a similar distribution of mold infection patterns for the three main genera: Penicillium (77.89%), Fusarium (74.73%), and Aspergillus (72.63%). However, for the genera Alternaria and Cladosporium, contamination was recorded in only 13.68% of samples in each case, indicating a very different result, compared with the data for the three main genera mentioned previously.

3.2. Aflatoxin B1 contamination

AFB1 levels were analyzed in samples of both wheat (61) and maize (68) during the 2022 harvesting season (Table 2). We found that maize samples were more likely to be contaminated than wheat samples; indeed, the incidence of AFB1 in maize (88.23%) was considerably higher than in wheat (4.91%).
In maize, AFB1 levels varied in a range of 0.390–69.122 mg/kg, and only eight samples were not contaminated (11.77%). Because European Regulation 2023/915 states that the MRL value for AFB1 is 5 mg/kg, we determined that a total of 28, or 41.18%, of the maize samples in the present study had levels of AFB1 above the MRL, indicating a high degree of risk to consumers were such maize to be consumed as food. In addition, when we considered total aflatoxin exposure with no other aflatoxin homologs, we found that 26 out of 68, or 38.23%, of the analyzed maize samples had levels above the MRL (10 mg/kg).

4. Discussion

4.1. Mycological contamination

Mycotoxins are considered one of the most serious contaminants of foodstuffs because of the risk of disease which they pose to both humans and animals. The issue of mycotoxin contamination is addressed in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2023/915, which sets out maximum levels for specific contaminants in food. Specifically, this regulation covers the most significant mycotoxins: AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, and AFG2; deoxynivalenol (DON); the fumonisins B1 (FB1) and FB2; zearalenone (ZEA); the T-2 and HT-2 toxins; and ochratoxin A (OTA) [28]. Two decades prior to this regulation, AFs were not even identified as a concern for primary production in Europe [22,23]. However, in the year 2003, the first alarming contamination of maize was reported in Italy [28].
With regard to specific crops, our findings showed that maize was contaminated at a higher rate compared to wheat. For the three main mold genera, Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Fusarium, a similar pattern distribution was exhibited in both crops. However, we found a different situation for the Alternaria and Cladosporium genera; in both cases, wheat samples were more likely to be affected than maize samples, with incidence percentages of 19.7%, and 2.90%, respectively.
With regard to the two regions used in our study, we found that the incidence of different genera was nonuniform. In the western part of Albania, characterized by low-altitude geography and a Mediterranean climate, all five genera were observed. However, in grain samples from the Korça plain, which is located in the Albanian interior is characterized by high altitude and typical continental climate, the presence of Cladosporium was not encountered.
Wheat samples from western regions manifested similar contamination patterns (approx. 103 cfu/g), regardless of sampling sites or mold genera.
With respect to maize contamination, our results indicated a highest-overall incidence for Penicillium sp. In terms of regions, the highest level of contamination was recorded for Penicillium sp. in maize samples from the Korça region (500x104 cfu/g), followed by Fusarium sp. in samples from the Fieri region (100x104 cfu/g) and the Korça region (80x104 cfu/g). The third-most prevalent mold belonged to the Aspergillus genera, whose highest incidence was in the Elbasan region (26x104 cfu/g), with contamination levels of 20–24x104 cfu/g in the regions of Fier, Korça, and Durrës.
With respect to wheat contamination, we found greatest incidence for Fusarium, Aspergillus, and Penicillium genera, with the highest values recorded for the Aspergillus genera (34x103 cfu/g), followed by Penicillium (10x103 cfu/g). In terms of regions, the highest contamination levels were found in wheat samples from the Fieri region. Alternaria genera were also present in samples from this region at a level of 1 x103 cfu/g. However, wheat samples from the Korça region exhibited a different mold-contamination pattern, with highest counts recorded for the Fusarium genera (5x102 cfu/g).

4.2. AFB1 presence in maize and wheat

Climate change has introduced aflatoxigenic species and increased the incidence of AFB1 in crops grown in Europe, especially southern Europe [30]. Climate-change scenarios involving an increase in temperature of only 2 °C suggest an increased probability of aflatoxin contamination—from low to medium—in European countries like France, Italy, and Romania where maize is expected to be cultivated [4,12]. One report on the incidence of AF in maize from the western Balkans found high levels of incidence and contamination during the harvesting season of 2013 [31]. The hot and dry conditions necessary for Aspergillus flavus infestation of maize mainly prevail in Europe at latitudes below 45° N [32]. As a country in southern Europe, Albania has faced climate modification in the last decades. Previous publications indicate that mycotoxin contamination in crops presents a critical food safety issue in the country [33,34]. The study of aflatoxin B1 in crops which may also be used as feed is especially important because feed contaminated with the AFB1 metabolite may result in the milk of lactating animals being contaminated with AFM1, another regulated mycotoxin; indeed, the presence of AFM1 in milk produced in Albania has already been reported in the literature [35]. Being toxic, carcinogenic, and immunosuppressive, aflatoxins can produce acute liver toxicoses, liver cancer, and growth impairment in children. Because of this, they are now the subject of ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the risk they pose to consumers worldwide [36].
Maize is used extensively as feed in poultry and cattle farming. In the present study, it was found that 32.35% of Albanian maize samples exceeded the MRL for the use of maize as animal feed (20 mg/kg). In contrast, just 2.1% of samples were found to exceed this level in a previous study of AFB1 in feed in Europe [37]. In addition, compared with data on the incidence of AFB1 from the years 2014 and 2015, we found that samples from 2023 exhibited a much lower level of incidence compared with 2014 (a mean value of 464 µg/kg), but a similar level compared with 2015 (a mean value of 55.7 µg/kg) [34]. This suggests that aflatoxin production may be dramatically influenced by annual climatic fluctuations.
In several regions, mycotoxin concentrations in maize have shown a pronounced year-to-year variation that could be explained by rainfall or temperature conditions during sensitive periods of grain development. Gruber-Dorninger and colleagues (2019) found that, globally, the incidence of AFB1 in maize was 24%. They also found that a large percentage (64%) of maize grains exhibited co-contamination involving two or more mycotoxins. The most frequently observed combinations were mixtures of fusarium toxins, e.g., a combination of deoxynivalenol zearalenone and fumonisins. Co-contaminations with fusarium and aspergillus toxins, e.g., fumonisins and aflatoxin B1, were also reported. In another study carried out in Serbia, an incidence level of 52.5% was reported for AFB1, with total concentrations of AFs in a range of 1–70.3 µg/kg [38],
In the present study, we analyzed wheat samples from three regions: Fieri, Elbasani, and Korça (Table 2). AFB1 was found in only three out of sixty-one samples, giving an incidence level of less than 5%. In these positive samples, concentrations ranged from 0.221-0.401 mg/kg, with a mean of 0.312 mg/kg, indicating that no sample exceeded the MRL (2 mg/kg) [39]. All the contaminated wheat samples originated from the Fieri region. Similar rates of contamination was found in a previous survey of Albanian wheat, with figures of 6.0% and 0.0% reported for the years 2014 and 2015, respectively [34].
Our data indicate a figure for AFB1 incidence in wheat which lies in the same range as data previously reported in the literature. In a review paper published by Gruber-Dorninger and colleagues (2019), a worldwide AFB1 incidence of 10% was reported. Our data also indicate a level of contamination which is lower than global referred median (1.0 mg/kg) or maximum (161 mg/kg) values. Compared with data from other countries in southeast Europe, we found a lower level of wheat contamination than that reported for Romania (45.4%) [40], but a similar level to that reported for Serbia [38], Croatia [28], and Italy [41]. Finally, AFB1 has been found to be more prevalent in southern Europe than in other European regions (28.9% compared to 5.9–17.0% positive samples) [37] and in China [42].
The globalization of trade in food commodities has indirectly increased the possibility that consumers in developing countries will be exposed to mycotoxins, with consequent impact upon health and quality of life. Ongoing monitoring of exported food products will ensure that products which do not comply with global food-quality standards will be distributed in local markets. Developing countries still need better monitoring and safety standards [43].

5. Conclusions

Maize and wheat production in Albania has a long tradition. After the communist system collapsed, drastic changes in the administration of arable agriculture land took place, During this period, state-cooperative farms which were capable of implementing good agricultural practices and ensuring food safety on arable land were replaced by smaller family farms. Although microbiological load does not always indicate mycotoxin contamination, interventions relating to good agricultural practices or to the selection of resistant cultivars should be considered as options for improving the current situation. In the case of contamination with Aspergillus sp., any intervention must be carried out in the field, and subsequent conditions for adequately storing the raw material must be evaluated and continuously controlled.
The data obtained in the present study indicate a low incidence of AFB1 contamination in the wheat commodity; only three out of sixty-one wheat samples were found to have levels of AFB1 contamination above MRL. However, there is a serious risk of AFB1 exposure for both humans and animals in the case of maize, due to its usage in both food and feed products. The concentration levels found in the present study may not be considered excessive; however, incidence rates were high, exceeding MRLs for both food and feed products.
Future incorporation of DNA techniques for identifying toxigenic versus non-toxigenic Aspergillus species and other molds from genera identified in the study may help farmers implement practices to decrease the incidence of mycotoxin contamination.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.T., Z.D; methodology, L.M.; validation, J.S.; L.M.; formal analysis, L.M.; J.S.; investigation, D.T.; resources, B.S.; data curation, E.H.; writing—original draft preparation, L.M.; writing—review and editing, D.T., Z.D.; visualization, E.H.; supervision, D.T.; project administration, D.T.; funding acquisition, D.T.
Please turn to the CRediT taxonomy for the term explanation. Authorship must be limited to those who have contributed substantially to the work reported.

Funding

This publication was founded by the Albanian National Agency for Scientific Research and Innovation (NASRI) grant R&D_2022_17. Check carefully that the details given are accurate and use the standard spelling of funding agency names at https://search.crossref.org/funding. Any errors may affect your future funding.

Acknowledgments

In this section, you can acknowledge any support given that is not covered by the author’s contribution or funding sections. This may include administrative and technical support or donations in kind (e.g., materials used for experiments).

Conflicts of Interest

Declare conflicts of interest or state, “The authors declare no conflict of interest.” Authors must identify and declare any personal circumstances or interests that may be perceived as inappropriately influencing the representation or interpretation of reported research results. Any role of the funders in the study's design, in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results must be declared in this section. If there is no role, please state, “The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results”.

References

  1. Bricher, J. L. Ensuring Global Food Safety-A Public Health Priority and a Global Responsibility. In: Ensuring Global Food Safety. Eds: C. E. Boisrobert, A. Stjepanovic, S. Oh, H. L.M. Lelieveld, Academic Press, Netherland, 2010, Pages 1-4.
  2. Patial, V.; Kumar Asrani, R.; & Thakur, M. Food-Borne Mycotoxicoses: Pathologies and Public Health Impact. Eds: A. Maria Holban & A. Mihai Grumezescu. In Handbook of Food Bioengineering, Foodborne Diseases, Academic Press, Netherland, 2018, pp. 239–274.
  3. Nazhand, A.; Durazzo, A.; Lucarini, M.; Souto, EB.; Santini, A. Characteristics, Occurrence, Detection and Detoxification of Aflatoxins in Foods and Feeds. Foods 2020, 9(5), 644. doi: 10.3390/foods9050644. [CrossRef]
  4. Luo, Sh.; Du, H.; Kebede, H.; Liu, Y.; Xing, F. Contamination status of major mycotoxins in agricultural product and foodstuff in Europe, Food Control 2021, 127, 108120, doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108120. [CrossRef]
  5. Groopman, J.D.; Wogan G.N. Aflatoxin: A Global Public Health Problem. Encyclopedia of Food and Health, Ed: Caballero, B.; Finglas, P.M. and Toldra, F. Academic Press, Netherland, 2015, pp. 68-72.
  6. WHO (2017). Evaluation of certain contaminants in food. Eighty-third report of the Joint FAO/WHO Conference on Food Additives. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, pp. 182.
  7. Khan, R.; Ghazali, F.M.; Mahyudin, N.A.; Samsudin, N.I.P. Aflatoxin Biosynthesis, Genetic Regulation, Toxicity, and Control Strategies: A Review. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 606. https://doi.org/10.3390/jof7080606. [CrossRef]
  8. Alameri, M.M.; Kong, A.S.-Y.; Aljaafari, M.N.; Ali, H.A.; Eid, K.; Sallagi, M.A.; Wan-Hee, C.; Abushelaibi, A.; Swee-Hua, E. L.; Jiun-Yan, L.; Kok-Song, L. Aflatoxin Contamination: An Overview on Health Issues, Detection and Management Strategies. Toxins 2023, 15, 246. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins15040246. [CrossRef]
  9. Owolabi, I.O.; Karoonuthaisiri, N.; Elliott, Ch. T.; Petchkongkaew, A. A 10-year analysis of RASFF notifications for mycotoxins in nuts. Trend in key mycotoxins and impacted countries. Food Res. Int 2023, 172, 112915, doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2023.112915. [CrossRef]
  10. IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). Aflatoxins. Chemical Agents and Related Occupations. A review of Human Carcinogens. IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, 2012, 100F, 225–248.
  11. Liu, Y. & Wu, F. Global burden of aflatoxin-induced hepatocellular carcinoma: a risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect 2010, 118(6), 818–824. [CrossRef]
  12. Schrenk, D.; Bignami, M.; Bodin, L.; Chipman, JK.; del Mazo, J.; Grasl-Kraupp, B.; Hogstrand, C.; Hoogenboom, LR.; Leblanc, J-C.; Nebbia, CS.; Nielsen, E.; Ntzani, E.; Petersen, A.; Sand, S.; Schwerdtle, T.; Vleminckx, C.; Marko, D.; Oswald, IP.; Piersma, A.; Routledge, M.; Schlatter, J.; Baert, K.; Gergelova, P. and Wallace, H.; Scientific opinion – Risk assessment of aflatoxins in food. EFSA J, 18(3), 2020; 6040, 112 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6040. [CrossRef]
  13. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on contaminants in the food chain related to the potential increase of consumer health risk by a possible increase of the existing maximum levels for aflatoxins in almonds, hazelnuts, pistachios, and derived products. EFSA J 2007, 446, 1–127. [CrossRef]
  14. Pitt, J.I.; Taniwaki, M.H.; Cole, M.B. Mycotoxin production in major crops as influenced by growing, harvesting, storage and processing, with emphasis on achieving Food Safety Objectives. Food Control 2012, 32, 205–13. [CrossRef]
  15. Mannaa, M.; Kim, K. D. Influence of Temperature and Water Activity on Deleterious Fungi and Mycotoxin Production during Grain Storage, Mycobiology 2017, 45:4, 240–254. [CrossRef]
  16. Chulze, S.N. Strategies to reduce mycotoxin levels in maize during storage: a review, Food Addit. Contam. Part A Chem. Anal. Control Expo. Risk Assess 2010, 27:5, 651–657. [CrossRef]
  17. Mahato, D.K.; Lee, K.E.; Kamle, M.; Devi, S.; Dewangan, K.N.; Kumar, P. and Kang, S.G. Aflatoxins in Food and Feed: An Overview on Prevalence, Detection and Control Strategies. Front Microbiol 2019, 10, 2266. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.02266. [CrossRef]
  18. Mostrom, M. Mycotoxins: Toxicology. In: Encyclopedia of Food and Health. Ed: Caballero, B.; Finglas, P.M. and Toldra, F. Academic Press, Netherland 2016, pp 43–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384947-2.00480-3. [CrossRef]
  19. Magnussen, A.; Parsi, M.A. Aflatoxins, hepatocellular carcinoma and public health. World J Gastroenterol 2013, 19(10):1508–1512.
  20. Eaton, D.L.; Beima, K.M.; Bammler, T.K.; Riley, R.T. & Voss, K.A. Hepatotoxic Mycotoxins. In: Comprehensive Toxicology, 3rd Edition; McQueen CA (ed.). Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2018; pp. 483–521. [CrossRef]
  21. JECFA (Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives). Aflatoxins. Safety evaluation of specific contaminants in food: prepared by the eighty-third meeting of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA). WHO Food Additives Series, Rome, Italy, 2018, 74, 2-280.
  22. Perrone, G.; Ferrara, M.; Medina, A.; Pascale, M.; Magan, N. Toxigenic fungi and mycotoxins in a climate change scenario: Ecology, genomics, distribution, prediction and prevention of the risk. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1496. [CrossRef]
  23. Leggieri, M.C.; Toscano, P.; Battilani, P. Predicted Aflatoxin B1 Increase in Europe Due to Climate Change: Actions and Reactions at Global Level. Toxins 2021, 13, 292. https://doi.org/10.3390/ toxins13040292. [CrossRef]
  24. INSTAT. Institute of Statistics of Albania Area of Field Crop. 2023. Available online: http://www.instat.gov.al/al/temat/bujq%C3%ABsia-dhe-peshkimi/bujq%C3%ABsia/#tab2. (accessed on 9 September 2023).
  25. VDLUFA. Standard operation procedure for the enumeration of microorganisms using solid culture media. In VDLUFA Method Book III, Suppl. 7 (ch. 28). VDLUFA Darmstadt, Germany, 2007,.
  26. European Union. Commission Regulation (EC) 2002/657/EC: Commission Decision of 12 August 2002 implementing Council Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the interpretation of results (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C (2002) 3044), Official Journal L. 2002, 221, 17/08/2002 P. 0008 – 0036.
  27. Commission Regulation (EC), No 401/2006 of February 23, 2006, laid down the sampling methods and analysis for the official control of mycotoxins levels in foodstuffs. Official J, L 2006, 70, 12–34.
  28. Kovač, M.; Bulaič, M.; Nevistič, A.; Rot, T.; Babič, J.; Panjičko, M.; Kovač, T.; Šarkanj, B. Regulated Mycotoxin Occurrence and Co-Occurrence in Croatian Cereals. Toxins 2022. 14, 112. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins14020112. [CrossRef]
  29. Piva, G.; Battilani, P.; Pietri, A. Emerging issues in southern Europe: Aflatoxins in Italy. In The Mycotoxin Factbook. Food & Feed Topics; Barug, D.; Bhatnagar, D.; Egmond, H.P.V.; Kamp, J.W.V.D.; Osenbruggen, W.A.V.; Visconti, A.; Eds.; Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2006; pp. 139–153.
  30. Van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Vermeulen, L.C.; Gavai, A.K.; Liu, C. Climate change impacts on aflatoxin b1 in maize and aflatoxin m1 in milk: A case study of maize grown in eastern Europe and imported to the Netherlands. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0218956. [CrossRef]
  31. de Rijk, T.C.; van Egmond, H.P.; van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Herbes, R., de Nijs, M., Samson, R.; Slate, A.B.; van der Spiegel. M. A study of the 2013 Western European issue of aflatoxin contamination of maize from the Balkan area. World Mycotoxin J 2015, 8(5), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.3920/WMJ2015.1903. [CrossRef]
  32. Battilani, P.; Toscano, P.; Van der Fels-Klerx, H.J.; Moretti, A.; Camardo Leggieri, M.; Brera, C.; Rortais, A.; Goumperis, T.; Robinson, T. Aflatoxin B1 contamination in maize in Europe increases due to climate change. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 24328. [CrossRef]
  33. Topi, D.; Tavčar-Kalcher, G.; Pavšič-Vrtač, K.; Babič, J.; &Jakovac-Strajn, B. Alternaria mycotoxins in grains from Albania: alternariol, alternariol monomethyl ether, tenuazonic acid, and tentoxin. World Mycotoxin J 2019, 12(1), 89–99. [CrossRef]
  34. Topi, D.; Babic, J.; Jakovac-Strajn, B. & Tavcar-Kalcher, G. Incidence of Aflatoxins and Ochratoxin A in Wheat and Corn from Albania. Toxins 2023, 15, 567. doi.org/10.3390/toxins15090567. [CrossRef]
  35. Topi, D.; Spahiu, J.; Rexhepi, A.; Marku, N. Two-year survey of aflatoxin M1 in milk marketed in Albania and human exposure assessment. Food Control 2022, 136, 108831. doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.108831. [CrossRef]
  36. Wu, F. (2010). Global Burden of aflatoxin‒induced disease: Final Report for the World Health Organization (WHO) Foodborne Disease Burden Epidemiology Reference Group (FERG) Chemical Task Force. Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
  37. Gruber-Dorninger, C.; Jenkins, T.; & Schatzmayr, G. Global Mycotoxin Occurrence in Feed: A Ten-Year Survey. Toxins 2019, 11(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins11070375. [CrossRef]
  38. Kos, J.J.; Škrinjar, M.M.; Mandić, A.I.; Mišan, A.Č.; Bursić, V.P.; Šarić, B.M.; Janić, Hajnal, E.P. Presence of aflatoxins in cereals from Serbia. Food and Feed Research 2014, 41, 1, 31–38. [CrossRef]
  39. European Commission. Commission Regulation (EU) No 2023/915 of 25 April 2023 on maximum levels for specific contaminants in food and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006. Off. J. Eur. Union, 2023, L 119, 103–157. (accessed on 28 August 2023).
  40. Gagiu, V.; Mateescu, E.; Armeanu, I.; Dobre, A.A.; Smeu, I.; Cucu, M.E.; Oprea, O.A.; Iorga, E.; Belc, N. Post-harvest contamination with mycotoxins in the context of the geographic and agroclimatic conditions in Romania. Toxins 2018, 10, 533. [CrossRef]
  41. Alkadri, D.; Rubert, J.; Prodi, A.; Pisi, A.; Manes, J.; Soler, C. Natural co-occurrence of mycotoxins in wheat grains from Italy and Syria. Food Chem 2014, 157, 111–118. [CrossRef]
  42. Sun, X. D.; Su, P.; Shan, H. Mycotoxin Contamination of Maize in China. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf 2017, 16(5), 835–849. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12286. [CrossRef]
  43. Stoev, S.D. Food safety and increasing hazard of mycotoxin occurrence in foods and feeds. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2013; 53(9), 887-901. [CrossRef]
Table 2. Aflatoxin B1 in maize and wheat from harvesting season of 2022.
Table 2. Aflatoxin B1 in maize and wheat from harvesting season of 2022.
Maize Wheat
Analyzed samples 68 61
Positive samples 60 3
Incidence (%) 88.23 4.91
Mean value (µg kg−1) 17.265 0.312
Median value (µg kg−1) 0.907 0.314
Minimum value (µg kg−1) 0.390 0.221
Maximum value (µg kg−1) 69.122 0.401
Table 3. AFB1 intervals in maize and risk-assessment in relation to MRL (5 μg/kg) of CE 2023/915 and feed MRL (20 μg/kg) of 2023/915L.
Table 3. AFB1 intervals in maize and risk-assessment in relation to MRL (5 μg/kg) of CE 2023/915 and feed MRL (20 μg/kg) of 2023/915L.
Interval (mg/kg) Number of samples Incidence (%)
0 8 11.8
0–5 32 47.06
Over 5 (MRL food) 28 41.18
5–10 2 2.94
Over 10 26 38.23
Over 20 (MRL feed) 22 32.35
Maximum (µg kg−1) 69,122
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

facebook logotwitter logolinkedin logo
MDPI Initiatives
Important Links
Subscribe

Disclaimer

Terms of Use

Privacy Policy

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated