Alternative use of aflatoxin contaminated grain

2,257 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,257
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • I want to indicate that to a certain degree aflatoxin is a problem we must grapple with (unavoidable)Environmental conditions favour aflatoxin production – certain geographical regions are therefore more susceptible than others (Ukambani e.g.). Solution may be to find alternative crops for such regionsAlthough not well developed, the fact that the Govt has/is setting certain regulations & testing in place means that aflatoxin may pose less and less danger to the human population in the future. Alternative uses will therefore become increasingly important
  • I will indicate that even the wet milling industry does not want to use aflatoxin contaminated grain because it would be concentrated in the by product gluten which ends up being undesirable to the Feeds industry (Aflatoxin in the by-product estimated to be 4x that in the corn)Similarly in bioethanol production the aflatoxin would be concentrated in the distillers grain hence no marketAs well, in a developing country reliant on corn to feed its populace, encouraging a bioethanol industry maybe a shot on the foot
  • In this slide trying to show that: In Kenya, the max. acceptable levels of aflatoxin in corn for animal feeds is similar to that for human foods (10ppb) and is more stringent than that allowed by the FDA (US) Unlike in the US where higher aflatoxin levels are acceptable for use in mature animals (except dairy) in Kenya no such segregation occurs. Therefore there is no joy for farmers in selling contaminated corn to feed millers Crucially there is no max standard (NS – no std) for aflatoxin in milk which is the most sensitive Rule of thumb in the feed milling industry is therefore similar to the food industry – avoid using mycotoxin contaminated or mouldy grain.
  • Physical methods apart from irradiation more practicalGrain Cleaning utilizes the fact that aflatoxin is concentrated in the finer particles of grain/feedBlending not expressly permitted by the FDA or KEBS (but the FDA does give approvals for this to be done on request)F – Fraction of contaminated feed in final blend C- Desired aflatoxin conc. L- aflatoxin conc. In the “uncontaminated” feed H – Aflatoxin Conc. In contaminated feed Use of Binders (e.g. HSCA) also not approved by FDA as a means of detoxifying mycotoxinsBiological methods are the new thing – being hugely researched
  • Binder added to those diets due to the sensitivity of that class of animalsNote that Blending not practiced as a tool to reduce toxicity (legislation?). Also, no segregation of RM to use in different classes of animals
  • Alternative use of aflatoxin contaminated grain

    1. 1. Alternative use of Aflatoxin Contaminated Grain (Animal Feeding)<br />Billy Okongo<br />Unga Farm Care (EA) Ltd.<br />
    2. 2. Background<br />Aflatoxins – part of a group of mycotoxins produced by fungi and considered unavoidable in the environment<br />Drought, extreme heat and insect damage on corn create an environment favourable to fungi growth and aflatoxin production<br />Some measures exist that can allow utilization of aflatoxin contaminated grain<br />There are attempts at regulation & testing by the Govt. which minimize the threat posed to human food supply chain<br />
    3. 3. Alternative Uses<br />In the Wet Milling Industry (Starch)<br />In Ethanol Production<br />In Animal Feeds<br />
    4. 4. Animal/Human Foods – Acceptable Levels<br />Source: CAST, 2003 ,CD 2003/100/EC , KEBS Standard Manuals, 2005 <br />NS – No Standard found<br />
    5. 5. Potential Methods of Reducing Aflatoxin Toxicity<br />
    6. 6. Managing Aflatoxins – UFCEA <br />All Incoming Grain/Oil Seed Cakes screened for aflatoxin @ 20ppb<br />Agri Screen (Neogen Corporation)<br />Blacklight (SeedBuroEqpt Company)<br />> 20ppb Rejected<br />< 20ppb quarantined and analysed quantitatively<br />HPLC - Fluorimetric (VICAM)<br />>10ppb Rejected<br />During Periods of Scarcity (Max 80ppb) - Add Binder (Clay based)<br />Binder Added to Duck, Turkey, Broiler & Breeder Diets irrespective of RM Analysis<br />
    7. 7. Challenges<br />Expensive<br />(HPLC ≈ KES. 2M (2500-3000 per sample), ELISA TEST KES. 800 – 2400 per sample)<br />Accuracy of Tests/poor calibration of standards/lack of cross referencing labs<br />Legal Limit extremely low (10ppb) and not correlated to available Rapid tests<br />Inadequacies in Govt Legislation<br />Does not allow segregation based on end use<br />Does not recognize use of mycotoxin binders <br />Most Raw Materials are bagged posing a challenge in sampling<br />

    ×