Arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in animal feed and feed materials : Trend analysis of monitoring result collected in the Netherlands

Abstract

Trend analysis of monitoring results collected in the NetherlandsArsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in animal feed and feed materials Adamse, P., H.J. Van der Fels-Klerx, J. de Jong, 2017. Arsenic, lead, cadmium and Based on the results, monitoring for arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury should focus on feed material of mineral origin, feed material of marine origin, especially fish meal, seaweed and algae, and feed additives belonging to the functional groups of (1) The aim of the current study was to gain insight into the contamination of feed materials and compound feed used in the Netherlands with arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury. The emphasis is on compliance with the maximum limits (MLs) set in the European Union, on background concentrations and on possible trends over time. The results can be used to define priorities for national monitoring plans.Part of this report has been published in Food Additives & Contaminants (Adamse et al, 2017 However, the monitoring programmes do have a risk-based design to some extent. In most samples all four elements were analysed at the same time. The analysis of mercury, cadmium, arsenic and lead concentrations in the samples was performed as described in Adamse et al (2009) using validated and accredited methods (Table 1). Data from RASFF were used for comparison. These data, covering the same time period, were subtracted from the RASFF portal with search criteria product type "feed" and hazard category "heavy metals" (RASFF, 2014). The RASFF data include all notifications from the EU.Usually, the feed materials that are notified in RASFF are also used in the Netherlands. This means that the warnings from other European countries are relevant for the Dutch situation as well. This will be addressed where applicable. Interpreting the resultsThe monitoring results were studied per contaminant and feed material product (sub)group. Each contaminant/product(sub)group combination was studied in detail with separate trend analyses using the average, median, P90 or % > ML. The result of those analyses are summarised in separate tables for each contaminant. Results are evaluated and colours in the trend tables are added to indicate the level of priority this feed of feed material should have in the national monitoring plan. The priority was considered high (I) when two or more of the following criteria were fulfilled: average concentration higher than 20% of ML, more than 3% of the samples exceeded the ML, a significant increase of the average concentration between 2007 and 2013, and/or more than five RASFF notifications (from all of Europe). The priority was also considered high when 10% or more of the samples exceeded the ML.The priority was considered medium (II) when only one of the criteria was fulfilled. With low priority (III) none of the criteria was fulfilled.10 | RIKILT report 2017.006 3 Results and discussionIn general the percentage of samples of all feeds and feed materials that exceed the ML was low for each of arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury, and did not inc...

Investigation of Selected Heavy Metals Concentration in Animal Feeds in United Arab Emirates

“…Mercury concentration of present study shows little higher when compared to other samples in poultry farms as 0.344 ppm [19].…”

“…[22]. Whereas in certain countries from year between 2001-2013 the Cd levels in dairy cattle feed, beef cattle feed was 3.77ppm and 5.1 ppm respectively [19].…”

“…Like fish feed were 7 ppm, 6.9 ppm, horse feed 6.7-8.7 ppm and mineral feed as 12 ppm. Dairy cattle field, animal manure of as 3.03 ppm and 9.01 ppm respectively contain high amount of Arsenic [19].…”

Food Security and Foodborne Mycotoxicoses—What Should Be the Adequate Risk Assessment and Regulation?

“…In Austrian feeds and feed raw materials, DON was found in around 60% of investigated cereal samples other than maize and in around 95% of maize samples [20]. High DON contamination levels were also found in liquid pig feed samples in The Netherlands, and 10% of the same sample exceeded the maximum permitted values [24]. DON is also the most prevalent mycotoxin in beer and, consequently, would be a real public health problem [25].…”

Animal Feeds Mycotoxins and Risk Management

“…In developing countries, many foods and feeds which otherwise can be available for consumption or trade are lost in production or storage [71]. The mycotoxins in animal feeds are one of the leading causes of output losses and increased management expenses in animal husbandry around the world [72].…”