Enzyme Degradation Reagents Effectively Remove Mycotoxins Deoxynivalenol and Zearalenone from Pig and Poultry Artificial Digestive Juices

Abstract

Mycotoxin removers include enzymes and adsorbents that may be used in animal feeds to eliminate the toxic effects of mycotoxins. This study aimed to determine the removability of two different types of mycotoxin removers, adsorbents and enzyme degradation reagents (EDRs), in the simulated gastrointestinal conditions of pigs and poultry. Seven commercial mycotoxin removers, including five EDRs and two adsorbents, were tested in vitro. In this study, the supplemented dosages of mycotoxin removers used in pig and poultry feeds were the commercial recommendation ranging from 0.05% to 0.2%. For pigs, the in vitro gastric and small intestinal simulations were performed by immersing the mycotoxin-tainted feed in artificial gastric juice (AGJ) at pH 2.5 for 5 h or in artificial intestinal juice (AIJ) at pH 6.5 for 2 h to mimick in vivo conditions. For poultry, mycotoxin-tainted feeds were immersed in AGJ for 2 h at pH 4.5 and 0.5 h at pH of 2.5, respectively, to simulate crop/glandular stomach and gizzard conditions; the small intestinal simulation was in AIJ for 2 h at pH 6.5. For the pig, EDRs and adsorbents had deoxynivalenol (DON) removability (1 mg/kg) of 56% to 100% and 15% to 19%, respectively. Under the concentration of 0.5 mg/kg, the zearalenone (ZEN) removability by EDRs and adsorbents was 65% to 100% and 0% to 36%, respectively. For the simulation in poultry, the removability of DON by EDRs and adsorbents (5 mg/kg) was 56% to 79% and 1% to 36%, respectively; for the concentration of 0.5 mg/kg, the removability of ZEN by EDRs and adsorbents was 38% to 69% and 7% to 9%, respectively. These results suggest that EDRs are more effective in reducing DON and ZEN contamination compared to the adsorbent methods in the simulated gastrointestinal tracts of pig and poultry. The recoveries of DON and ZEN of pig in vitro gastrointestinal simulations were higher than 86.4% and 84.7%, respectively, with 88.8% and 85.9%, respectively, in poultry. These results demonstrated the stability and accuracy of our mycotoxin extraction process and in vitro simulation efficiency.

Comparative efficacy of commercially available deoxynivalenol detoxifying feed additives on growth performance, total tract digestibility of components, and physiological responses in nursery pigs fed diets formulated with naturally contaminated corn1

“…As opposed to aflatoxin, DON is difficult to bind due to its non-polar structure, thus challenging the effectiveness of FA that rely solely on binding capacity ( Jouany, 2007 ; Sabater-Vilar et al, 2007 ). Various FA have been promoted for enzymatic deactivation, detoxification, and immune support as primary modes of action for mitigating deleterious effects of DON in swine production ( Karlovsky, 2011 ; Patience et al, 2014 ; Bich et al, 2015a ; Frobose et al, 2015 ; 2017 ; Tso et al, 2019 ). However, the empirical data is less convincing.…”

The Potential of Peroxidases Extracted from the Spent Mushroom (Flammulina velutipes) Substrate Significantly Degrade Mycotoxin Deoxynivalenol

“…The AGJ and AIJ were prepared according to Tso et al [ 53 ] and Wang et al [ 15 ]. For the preparation of AGJ, sodium chloride (2 g) and pepsin (3.2 g) were dissolved in sufficient water.…”

“…Similar to the pre-test procedure, the simulation conditions for the gastrointestinal tracts of pig and poultry were based on the procedures reported in Tso et al [ 53 ]. Different DON concentrations for pig (1 mg/kg) and poultry (5 mg/kg) feeds were used based on a report from the China Hygienic Standard for Feed (GB13078-2017) and FDA regulations [ 54 ].…”

“…The DON analysis was slightly modified according to methods described in Tso et al [ 53 ]. For extracting DON from the solid samples (PDA and feed), 5 g of solid sample was mixed with 20 mL of DON extraction solution (1 g PEG/20 mL water) in a 250 mL quartz cup.…”

Revisiting the scope and applications of food enzymes from extremophiles

“… b Commercial aflatoxin enzyme degrading reagents reported (e.g., EDR1 and EDR2 by Detoxa Plus ® New/Dr. Bata (Tso, Ju, Fan, & Chiang, 2019)) were not extremozymes. …”