Transport of Organic Environmental Contaminants to Animal Products

Fries, George F.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2530-0_3

Cited by 65 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 149 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, grazing also enhances soil intake by herbivores (soil particles on vegetation, root intake, Abrahams and Steigmajer, 2003) resulting in an increased exposure to gastrointestinal parasites (Stromberg, 1997) and environmental contaminants (Laurent et al, 2005). Although ingested soil may be a source of mineral nutrients for animals (Thornton and Abrahams, 1983), several studies pointed out soil as being one of the main matrices for pollutants transfer to outside-reared animals (Beresford and Howard, 1991;Fries, 1995;Matscheko et al, 2002). Lipophilic properties of the persistent organic pollutants are responsible for their adsorption on soil components, which enables soil to retain and accumulate pollutants in the horizon surface longer than the other matrices (also called memory effect) (Jones et al, 1989;Duarte-Davidson and Jones, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of soil intake by growing Creole young bulls in common grazing systems in humid tropical conditions

Jurjanz

Collas

Lastel

et al. 2017

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil is the main matrix which contributes to the transfer of environmental pollutants to animals and consequently into the food chain. In the French West Indies, chlordecone, a very persistent organochlorine pesticide, has been widely used on banana growing areas and this process has resulted in a long-term pollution of the corresponding soils. Domestic outside-reared herbivores are exposed to involuntary soil intake, and tethered grazing commonly used in West Indian systems can potentially favour their exposure to chlordecone. Thus, it appears necessary to quantify to what extent grazing conditions will influence soil intake. This experiment consisted of a cross-over design with two daily herbage allowance (DHA) grazed alternatively. Six young Creole bulls were distributed into two groups (G1 and G2) according to their BW. The animals were individually tethered and grazed on a restrictive (RES) or non-restrictive (NRES) levels of DHA during two successive 10-days periods. Each bull progressed on a new circular area every day. The two contrasting levels of DHA (P < 0.001) were obtained via a different daily grazing surface area (RES: 20 m 2 /animal, NRES: 31 m 2 /animal; P < 0.01) offered to the animals by the modulation of the length of the tethering chain (RES: 1.9 m, NRES: 2.6 m). These differences in offered grazing areas resulted in DHA of 71 and 128 g DM/kg BW 0.75 , respectively for RES and NRES treatments. As expected, the animals grazing on the reduced area realized a lower daily dry matter intake (DMI) (RES: 1.12 kg/100 kg BW, NRES: 1.83 kg/100 kg BW; P < 0.05) and present a lower organic matter digestibility (RES: 0.67, NRES: 0.73; P < 0.01) than NRES ones, due in part to the shorter post-grazing sward surface height (RES: 3.3 cm, NRES: 5.2 cm; P < 0.01) of their grazing circles. Soil intake was estimated on an individual level based on the ratio of the marker titanium in soil, herbage and faeces. Grazing closer to the ground, animals on RES treatment ingested a significantly higher proportion of soil in their total DMI (RES: 9.3%, NRES: 4.4%; P < 0.01). The amount of ingested soil in the diet was not significantly different between the two treatments (RES: 98 g/100 kg BW, NRES: 78 g/100 kg BW; P > 0.05) due to the lower DMI of RES compared with NRES treatment.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of soil intake by growing Creole young bulls in common grazing systems in humid tropical conditions

Jurjanz

Collas

Lastel

et al. 2017

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The PAHs found in the lens have a molecular weight ranging between 202.26 and 228.29 D and consequently it is not known if they can penetrate into the lens. Moreover, in bovines PAHs do not bioaccu mulate in meat and milk; accumulation has been shown only in kidney, where PAHs arc actively taken up, metabolized and excreted in the urine and in lipid-rich tissue [17], due to the lipophilicity of these substances. The lens has a lipid concentration below 1% [19] and consequently may not be considered a privileged site in PAH accumulation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The presence of PAHs in tissue is generally considered the result of pollution and the most important source is usually food [17], but we believe the two hypotheses should be examined as to whether PAHs are due to an external source or to endogenous metabolism of the lens. The final answer to this question is outside the scope of our paper, but we want to underline some findings among our results that need further investigation in order to be fully ex plained.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Bovine Lens

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A study was performed to detect the presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in bovine eyes. Twenty fresh bovine eyes were used to detect the presence of PAHs in lens, vitreous and aqueous by HPLC and spectrofluorometer. In lenticular tissue the mean amount of PAHs was 0.0271 μg/g and the mean level of PAH in each lens was 0.059 μg. Five types of PAHs (pyrene, fiuoranthene, triphenylene, 1.2-benzanthracene and chrysene) were found in the lenses but none in vitreous and aqueous. These data indicate that PAHs are present only in the lens of the bovine eye. The source of these substances in mammalian clear lens is unclear.

show abstract

“…Kaba yemlere nazaran tane yemlerin dioksin içeriği daha düşüktür. Bu nedenle ruminantlara göre kanatlı hayvanların dioksine maruz kalma düzeyleri daha düşük olmaktadır (Fries, 1995). Ayrıca ruminant hayvanlar merada beslenmeleri esnasında bir miktar toprak yedikleri için az miktarlarda dioksin almaktadırlar (Winters ve ark., 2000).…”

Section: Dioksinlerin Kontaminasyon Kaynaklarıunclassified

Dioksinlerin Hayvan Beslemedeki Genel Etkileri

Çalışlar

Karaman

2017

Turkish JAF Sci.Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dioksinler; hayvanlarda karaciğer toksisitesine, ağırlık kaybına, bağışıklık sisteminin baskılanmasına, üreme gücünde zayıflamaya, yumurta kabuğunda incelmeye, doğum kusurlarına, kanserlere ve ölüme yol açan kimyasal bir gruptur. Özellikle, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) çok zehirlidir ve üzerinde yoğun çalışmaların yapıldığı çevresel toksinlerden biridir. Yüksek dozları hemen her hayvan türünü etkilemektedir. Dioksinin insanlarda kanser oluşturma riskine sahip olduğu yapılan araştırmalarla doğrulanmıştır. Bu nedenle Uluslararası Kanser Araştırma Kurumu dioksini birinci sınıf kanserojen olarak tanımlamıştır. Dioksinler, yağda eridiklerinden et, süt, yumurta ve balık gibi hayvansal gıdalarda depolanmakta ve mevcudiyetini çok uzun yıllar devam ettirmektedirler. Bu nedenledir ki insanların önemli bir kısmı, hayvansal ürünlerle, hava yoluyla ve deri temasıyla birlikte her gün bir miktar dioksin'e maruz kalabilmektedir. Hayvan yemlerine ilave edilen organik asitler, pH değiştiriciler nişasta, şeker, bitkisel ve hayvansal yağlar, meyve ve sebze işleme yan ürünleri, kaolinit, rendering ürünleri ile pelet yapımına yardımcı maddeler dioksinlerin kontaminasyonuna neden olmaktadır. Bitkisel orijinli yem maddelerinin hepsinde ve bunların yan ürünlerindeki maksimum dioksin miktarı 0,75 ng toksik eşdeğerliliği/kg'dır. Bu derlemede, dioksinlerin çiftlik hayvanlarının beslemesine olan etkileri incelenmiştir. The General Effects of Dioxins on Livestock Feeding A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T Review ArticleReceived 27 January 2017 Accepted 03 April 2017Dioxins is one of the chemicals groups that cause liver toxicity, live weight reduction, immune suppression, reproductive impairments, eggshell thinning, birth defects, cancers and death in animals. The 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) is the most poisonous environmental chemical and many studies were showed high dosage of TCDD affects all animal group. Also TCDD increase cancer risk in human so this chemical described as carcinogenic by International Agency for Research on Cancer. Dioxins are stored in animal foods such as meat, milk, eggs and fish, because they are soluble in oil and remain in these products for many years. Dioxins can dissolve in fat and high stability therefore it can be infected to meat, milk, egg, and fish and store there for long time as a result people could be contained with dioxin during daily life. Animal feed additives such as organic acids, pH modifiers, starch, sugar, vegetable oil, fat, fruit and by-products of plant, kaolinite, rendering products, pelleting aids cause dioxin contamination. The maximum dioxin content in plant-origin feedstuffs and their byproducts is 0.75 ng toxic equivalent/kg body weight. In this rewiew, the effects of dioxins on livestock feeding was examined.

show abstract

Transport of Organic Environmental Contaminants to Animal Products

Cited by 65 publications

References 149 publications

Evaluation of soil intake by growing Creole young bulls in common grazing systems in humid tropical conditions

Evaluation of soil intake by growing Creole young bulls in common grazing systems in humid tropical conditions

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Bovine Lens

Dioksinlerin Hayvan Beslemedeki Genel Etkileri

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About