Get documents about "ARI The Importance of Mycotoxins and a Brief History of Mycotoxin
Document Sample
ARI The Bulletin of the Istanbul Technical University VOLUME 54, NUMBER 4
Guest Editor
The Importance of Mycotoxins and a Brief History
of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
Dilek Heperkan
˙
Department of Food Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, 34469 Maslak, Istanbul, Turkey
Turkey produces several agricultural products, hence the presence of mycotoxins in products with high export
potential such as hazelnuts, figs, raisins, red pepper as well as local consumer products such as cereals, milk and
cheeses and olives is of great importance, in terms of both public health and the economy. Studies related to these
products have been investigated for the presence of mycotoxins. This paper aims to estimate the exposure to the
consumers to mycotoxins through investigating the research on mycotoxin contamination in different foodstuffs
in Turkey, as well as to the literature and to research in the future and to mycotoxin strategies and methods in
our country.
Keywords: Nuts, figs, cereals, red pepper, olives, mycotoxins, mycotoxigenic moulds.
1. Introduction
Mycotoxins are toxic metabolites which pro-
duce mainly Ascomycetes that are harmful to
health. Although there are more than 300 known
mycotoxins today, only 5 or 6 are accepted to
have primary importance. Although it would
be extremely difficult to make a ranking includ-
ing all countries and their products, researchers
are unanimous in considering aflatoxins (AF),
ochratoxins, fumonisins (FUM), trichothecenes
and zearalenone (ZEN) to be mycotoxins of pri-
mary importance [1, 2]. Turkey is an agricultural
country producing several agricultural products. Figure 1. Susceptible commodities and important
We are among the world’s leading producers of mycotoxins in Turkey.
high export potential products such as hazelnuts
(first place), pistachio nuts (second place), figs
and red pepper. When the consumption habits of
Turks are borne in mind, it will be seen that to- basic local diet and consumption by virtually all
gether with the dried fruits, nuts and spices con- age-groups.
sidered, cereals and related products, milk and
dairy products and olives are among the most 2. Milk and Cheese
frequently consumed items daily. Fig. 1 shows
the susceptible commodities and important my- Aflatoxin M1 is derivative of AFB1 , and this
cotoxins in Turkey. It has been arranged based mycotoxin is present in milk from cows consum-
on research carried out in our country. Although ing feed contaminated with AFB1 . The sources of
a study only on cyclopiazonic acid (CPA) pres- the aflatoxin present in the feed are peanut, maize
ence has not been found, CPA production has and cotton seed residues. Aflatoxin M1 was stable
been included in the list bearing in mind that As- in raw milk and was resistant to pasteurization
pergillus flavus produces CPA together with afla- and processing [3]. Other mycotoxins which may
toxins. Attention will be focused on the presence be present in milk include ochratoxin A (OTA)
of mycotoxins in export products and on the work and CPA [4, 5]. It has been demonstrated that
in this field in Turkey, considering points such as CPA present in feed passes into milk and that
the frequency of consumption, being a part of the processes such as freezing, freeze drying and pas-
teurization do not reduce the quantity of CPA;
The Importance of Mycotoxins and A Brief History of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
Table 1
The occurrence of AF M1 in Turkish milk samples.
Region Method Number Positive Samples Max. Toxin Exceeded Limits Ref.
of Samples (µg/kg) >0.05 µg/kg
Number % Number %
Van province TLC 90 79 87.8 0.12 35 38.9 [6]
Different cities HPLC/TLC 360 159 44.2 1.40 48 13.3 [7]
Different cities (30)a HPLC 543 206 37.9 2.02 82 15.1 [8]
Istanbul ELISA 67 61 91.0 0.16 16 23.9 [9]
Different cities (7)a HPLC 48 34 70.8 0.81 16 33.3 [10]
Istanbul HPLC 87 69 79.3 0.56 8 9.2 [11]
Bursa ELISA 115 114 99.1 0.21 68 59.1 [12]
a: Number of cities
similarly as CPA is stable in milk, no reduction basic diet and are consumed frequently by almost
takes place during storage, either. Therefore it every age-group and that they are also widely
has been claimed that the risk of milk containing used as raw material in animal feed and are seri-
CPA reaching consumers is high [4]. ously infected by moulds before harvesting, they
Studies were performed for AFM1 in 1310 milk constitute a group which needs urgent attention
samples taken in Turkey between 1999 and 2004 in terms of mycotoxins. Furthermore, one or more
[6-12]. 7 studies were carried out, and the meth- of the major mycotoxins mentioned in the Intro-
ods used were as follows: TLC in one study, duction are encountered either singly or together
HPLC in three studies and ELISA in two stud- in cereals. Cereals and cereal products create a fa-
ies. TLC and HPLC were used together in one vorable environment to toxic mould development
study (Table 1). AFM1 was found to be present in and mycotoxin formation. Mycotoxins found in
55.0% of the milk samples and 21% of the samples cereals and related work done in Turkey is pre-
exceeded the limit, the highest value observed be- sented in Table 3, according to the type of prod-
ing 2.02 µg/kg (Table 1). The limit value in this uct.
evaluation was taken as 0.05 µg/kg. No study Considering the number of studies done in
on ochratoxin A and cyclopiazonic acid in milk is Turkey on cereals and cereal products, a sin-
known to have been made in Turkey. gle study exists on AF, OTA and sterigmato-
Aflatoxin M1 is not significantly decreased dur- cystin (STE) in maize, one on T-2, three on FUM
ing the ripening of cheese [13]. An evaluation and one on deoxynivalenol (DON). Although the
was made on the presence of AFM1 in Turkish number of studies on this subject is extremely
cheeses with 1813 samples. Thirteen studies were low, consumers in Turkey may be exposed to
carried out between 1992 and 2005 [14-23], and different mycotoxins through cereals and cereal
ELISA was used in twelve of the studies (Table products.
2). Incidence of AFM1 was 69.9% and 17.8% of
the samples exceeded the limit, the highest value 4. Hazelnuts
encountered was 4 µg/kg (Table 2); the limit in
Turkish Codex for AFM1 in cheeses is 0.25 µg/kg. The presence of aflatoxin in hazelnuts, one of
These values indicate that consumers in Turkey our major export products, has been controver-
are exposed to AFM1 through milk and cheese. sial from time to time. Average annual produc-
tion of 600,000 tones (averages from 1997 to 2001)
3. Cereals and Cereal Products of nuts makes Turkey the leading producer. The
presence of aflatoxin in large quantities in Turk-
The first studies to establish the presence of ish hazelnuts has been reported several times by
mycotoxin were carried out on cereal products. the European Union and, as a result, Spain has
Penicillium puberulum isolated from mouldy received incentives to produce hazelnuts. Losses
maize was discovered to be toxic in 1913, and this resulting from EU rejection of nuts between 1998
toxic substance was named penicillic acid [24]. and 2002 are claimed to amount to 4.5 million US
Since cereal and cereal products are a part of the dollars [39].
19
Dilek Heperkan
Table 2
The occurrence of AF M1 in Turkish cheese samples.
Region Method Number Positive Samples Max. Toxin Exceeded Limits Ref.
of Samples (µg/kg) >0.05 µg/kg
Number % Number %
Konya 140 − − − 0 0 [14]
Istanbul ELISA 25 11 44.0 0.5 5 20.0 [15]
Van ELISA 50 22 44.0 0.4 3 6.0 [15]
Bursa ELISA 57 51 89.5 0.81 7 12.3 [16]
Various cities ELISA 110 101 91.8 2.0 6 5.5 [17]
Istanbul ELISA 186 121 65.1 > 0.25 35 18.8 [18]
Istanbul ELISA 64 52 81.3 > 0.25 20 31.3 [18]
Bursa ELISA 130 111 85.4 0.79 17 13.1 [19]
Bursa ELISA+IAC 125 86 68.8 0.74 28 32.5 [19]
Ankara ELISA 400 327 81.8 0.8 110 27.5 [20]
Erzurum EIA 63 28 44.4 0.20 0 0 [21]
Istanbul ELISA 363 283 78.0 4.10 80 22.0 [22]
Erzurum ELISA 50 41 82.0 0.33 3 6.0 [23]
The first research in Turkey on aflatoxin in µg/kg [45]. Therefore the over-limit ratio can be
hazelnuts was commenced in 1967. Shelled hazel- considered to be fairly low. Aflatoxin distribution
nuts exported to Canada and the United States in hazelnuts is not homogenous; A.flavus infec-
of America were rejected because they contained tion was encountered only in nuts with damaged
aflatoxin. Detailed information concerning the shells, which accounts for the high levels found in
work done on hazelnuts can be found in the Pro- some of the nuts. Results indicate that aflatoxin
ceedings of the First Mycotoxin Symposium [40]. production is encountered in hazelnuts only from
Mould growth and mycotoxin production are time to time. Therefore the risk of exposure to
common concerns of all countries producing and aflatoxin from this source is fairly low. However,
consuming hazelnuts. Hazelnut is protected by evaluated in terms of the magnitude of the hazard
a hard shell. Aspergillus flavus and aflatoxin are when it exists, it could be considered high. The
not encountered in the endosperm while it is still highest permitted level after shelling and other
on the tree before harvesting. The endosperm be- stages of physical processing, or in nuts used as
comes infected with moulds when the hard shell ingredients, was taken as 5 µg / kg for aflatoxin
is damaged or is attacked hazelnut maggots or B1 , and as 10µg / kg for total aflatoxin [46]. The
similar pests. Aflatoxin is formed during the har- proposal at the meeting of the European Commis-
vesting and drying stages and is present only in sion for Food Additives and Contaminants held
small quantities when drying begins. No inci- in 2003 to raise the maximum permitted levels
dences of A.flavus infection or aflatoxin have been for aflatoxin in unprocessed hazelnuts, pistachio
encountered in hazelnuts with undamaged shells nuts and almonds to 15µg/kg, was postponed un-
[40,41]. Predominant fungal species and their til March 2005. However the limits have stayed
possible mycotoxin production in hazelnut is pre- unchanged so far. Losses resulting from rejection
sented in Table 4. According to research carried by the EU of exported nuts amounted to 4.5 mil-
out in Turkey between 1987 and 2003, 1257 hazel- lion US dollars between 1998 and 2002. It was
nut samples collected from the Black Sea region claimed that, if the permitted limits were raised,
c
in general and from Ak¸akoca in particular were the losses sustained would be reduced by 44%. In
analyzed for aflatoxin [42-45]. The over-limit ra- the Commission report of 2003 it was stated that
tio was 3.8% (Table 5). This evaluation was done the over-limit for aflatoxin had been exceeded in
on the basis of a limit value of 2µg/kg for afla- ground nuts originating from China, in pistachio
toxin B1 and 4µg/kg for total aflatoxin. While in nuts originating from Iran and in hazelnuts orig-
some studies no aflatoxin in hazelnuts was found inating from Turkey, causing to propose that the
[43], other studies reported values as high as 135 products should be monitored closely and that
20
The Importance of Mycotoxins and A Brief History of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
Table 3
Mycotoxin contamination in cereal in Turkey.
Product Mycotoxins Reference Mycotoxins which were References
studied in Turkey
Wheat AF [5,25,26,27,28]
OTA
DON DON [31]
T-2, HT-2, ZEN, CIT
Ergot alcaloids
Barley AF [27,29,30]
FB1
OTA OTA [32]
Ergot alcaloids, CIT
DON, NIV, T-2, HT-2
DAS
Oats OTA, T-2, HT-2 [5,26]
DON, CIT
Rye OTA,DON [26]
ergot alcaloids, CIT
Maize AF [5,26] AF [33]
OTA OTA [33]
CPA STE [33]
ZEN [34]
T-2, HT-2, FUM T2 [35]
FB1 [36]
FB1 , FB2 [37]
FUM
DON [31]
CIT
Rice AF, T-2, HT-2, CIT [5] AF [38]
CIT: citrinin; DAS: diacetoxy-scirpenol; DON: deoxyinivalenol; FUM, FB: fumonisin; OTA: ochratoxin A;
ZEN : zearalenon
additional trading limits be imposed [39]. tamination was found in 41% of the ripe figs
picked from trees, in 21% of the figs collected
5. Figs from the ground and in 42% of those dried in
the sun. The ratio for figs obtained from stor-
Figs are included in the second most widely- age facilities was 33%, 25% for figs obtained from
consumed group of fruits [47]. Compared to other factories/shops and 25% for fig paste [49].
fruits, levels of aflatoxin in figs are seen to be 72% of the A.flavus isolates form aflatoxin in a
higher. The amount which could be present in a YES medium (Table 7). When this ratio is com-
single fig varies between 180 and 360µg/kg (non- pared to ratios for other products, it is rather
florescent and florescent). It has been reported high; for example, ratios were 48% for hazelnuts
that these high values could present hazards for [41] and 35% for pistachio nuts [50]. However,
consumers [48]. high values were also encountered in other studies
Mycoflora was detected in 63 fig samples ob- carried out on figs. The toxin-forming character-
tained from 11 different orchards in the Aegean istics of the moulds isolated from figs were stated
region. Although the dominant flora varied ac- to be 85% [51] and 67% [52].
cording to the stages at which the figs were Results obtained in the aflatoxin study carried
obtained, Aspergillus sect. Nigri, A.flavus and out on the same samples were as follows: for figs
Fusarium spp. were the most frequently encoun- on the tree, 32% (3.7-60.0B1 µg/kg -3.2-37.7 G1
tered species of mould (Table 6). A.flavus con-
21
Dilek Heperkan
Table 4
Predominant fungal species and their possible mycotoxin production in hazelnut.
Genus Species Possible mycotoxin productiona
Aspergillus section F lavi A.f lavus Aflatoxin B1 , Cyclopiazonic acid
β-nitropropionic acid (BNP)
A.parasiticus Aflatoxin B1 , B2 , G1 , G2
Aspergillus section N igri A.niger/A.carbonarius Ochratoxin A
P enicillium P.aurantiogriseum Penicillic acid, Verrucosidin
P.commune Cyclopiazonic acid
P.brevicompactum Mycopenolic acid, Botryodipliodin
P.crustosum Roquefortine C, Penitrem A
P.f ellutanum −
P.janczewskii Penitrem A
Cladosporium Cladosporium spp. (C.herbarum), Cladosporic acid
Eurotium Eurotium spp. −
T richoderma T richoderma spp. (T.virens, T.viride), Gliotoxin
Emodin, Trichodermin
T richothecium T richothecium roseum Trichothecenes
a:adopted from Frisvad and Thrane, (2002).
µg/kg); for figs which had fallen on the ground was present .
and had been in contact with the soil, 21% (1.8- Since attention was focused on A.flavus in our
63.0 B1 µg/kg -15.2-78.9 G1 µg/kg); at the drying studies, all black moulds were defined as As-
stage, 17% (0.5-3.7 B1 µg/kg -0.5-4.0 G1 µg/kg); pergillus sect. Nigri. When the Aspergillus sect.
in storage, 33%, at the processing stage, 25% and Nigri ratio in figs is examined, it is seen to be
in fig paste, 60% [53]. According to these results, 64.3% in figs fallen on the ground, 75.0% at the
aflatoxin contamination initiates while the fig is drying stage and 100% in samples obtained from
still on the tree. storage, during processing and from fig paste [49].
Another species of mould which de- These high values also make the samples haz-
serves investigation, just as much as ardous in terms of OTA.
A.flavus − A.parasiticus, is black Aspergilli such The fact that the ratio of aflatoxin-producing
as Aspergillus section Nigri. It was established moulds in the samples is extremely high, fig is
in 1994 that A.carbonbarius mould, which resem- considered to be a high-risk product in terms of
bles A.niger in many ways, produces ochratoxin aflatoxin, bearing in mind that the pH value of
[54,55]. A.carbonarius is not mentioned fre- fig (4.7-5.0) is favourable to aflatoxin production,
quently in literature. However, it is reported that aflatoxin is produced before harvesting and
that this situation does not stem from the fact that aflatoxin concentration is high even in one
that it is less frequently encountered, but be- single fig. The presence of members of the black
cause all black Aspergillus isolates are defined Aspergillus species, which generate ochratoxin in
as A.niger [54]. In a study carried out on figs, together with the presence of OTA and mem-
three types of mould with black conidia, a to- bers of the Fusarium strain, all constitute a risk
tal of 470 A.niger , 245 A.carbonarius and 200 in terms of fumonisins.
A.japonicus isolates were investigated in terms
of their ochratoxin-forming capabilities [54,55].
It was observed that the mould which in fact 6. Olives
formed the toxin was A.carbonarius and that
Olives are an important product in terms of the
all the isolates formed ochratoxin. Aspergillus
economy and nutrition. Olives are consumed at
niger produced ochratoxin rarely and in small
the table (30%), while a part of the crop is utilized
quantities and A.japonicus did not produce any
for olive oil production. Ninety six per cent of
toxin at all. It was reported that A.carbonarius
the world s olives originate in the Mediterranean
could grow in all environments in which A.niger
region and the main producers are Spain, Italy,
22
The Importance of Mycotoxins and A Brief History of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
Table 5
Mycotoxin studies in hazelnut in Turkey.
Region Method Number Positive Samples Range Exceeded Limits Reference
of Samples (µg / kg) >2µg / kg AFB1
>4µg / kg Total AFs
Number % Number %
Giresun/ TLC 25 5 20 AFB1 : 1.1 − 1.8 − − [42]
Ordu
Giresun TLC 30 0 − − − − [43]
Giresun HPLC 725 176 23.6 AFB1 : 0.1 − 2.8 3 0.4 [44]
Ordu Total AFs:0.4-5.6
Akcakoca
Akcakoca HPLC 176 176 100 AFB1 : 2.7 − 75 10 5.7 [45]
Total AFs : 4.7 − 79
Giresun HPLC 140 140 100 AFB1 : 2.2 − 75.7 20 14.3 [45]
Total AFs : 4.3 − 150
Ordu HPLC 161 161 100 AFB1 : 2.1 − 29.4 16 9.9 [45]
Total AFs : 3.6 − 135.5
Greece and Turkey. In addition, California-type established in 34 out of 42 samples obtained in
black olives are also commercially important. the Marmara region (81%), the quantity being
A considerable amount of research has been between 75 and 350 µg/kg. The presence of cit-
done on mycotoxins in olives. In studies relat- rinin in 20 out of 27 samples obtained from the
ing to aflatoxin, some researchers have reported Aegean region (74%) was observed, the highest
that olives are a weak substrate for aflatoxin for- amount being 100 µg/kg. The big difference in
mation [56-58]. On the other hand, the fact that terms of citrinin quantities between the two re-
aflatoxin B1 has been encountered in olive oil (5- gions and the high level of toxin in the Marmara
10 µg/kg) demonstrates that olive is a product region are obvious.
favorable to aflotoxin production [59,60]. Factors Mould growth was observed in 17 out of 42
such as sterilization of the olives in the autoclave samples (40.5%) obtained from the Marmara re-
in the course of research, the method of aflatoxin gion. When the isolated moulds were studied, it
analysis, addition of olive paste to the agar, all af- became evident that no Aspergillus- type mould
fect the results [56,58]. For example, Daradimos was present, and that virtually all of the isolates
et al. [60] have drawn attention to the analy- were of the Penicillium species, P .crustosum and
sis method used for aflatoxin. They applied two P .viridicatum being the most frequently encoun-
different methods to olive oil samples. While no tered. Mould growth was observed in 15 out of
aflatoxin was encountered with one method, the 27 samples (55.5%) obtained from the Aegean re-
other method indicated the presence of aflatoxin gion; A.versicolor grew in only two of the samples
B1 in 72% of the samples. and moulds of the P enicillium spp. dominated
Examining research on other mycotoxins in the flora, P.roqueforti and P.viridicatum being
olives, it becomes evident that A.ochraceus, the most frequent species. Neither P .citrinum
A.petrakii and P.expansum isolates obtained nor any other citrinin-producing moulds were
from the olives do not generate ochratoxin and found. However, in earlier research, it was
patulin [61]. Neither was any patulin found in found that when olives were kept in tanks dur-
a study covering 6 olive samples [62]. However, ing the ripening process their surface was cov-
Penicillum citrinum isolated from olives gener- ered with mould. P .citrinum was isolated
ated citrinin [63]. In a study carried out on black [63,65]. In another study, the existence of
table olives obtained from markets in Istanbul P .citrinum, P .verrucosum and small quantities
and in the Aegean region, 77% of the samples of P .expansum was observed [65]. Since no work
were found to contain citrinin, its amount being has been done on the mould flora in olives af-
25-375 µg/kg [64]. The presence of citrinin was ter harvesting, it is considered that formation of
23
Dilek Heperkan
Table 6
Predominant fungal species and their possible mycotoxin production in dried figs
Genus Species Possible mycotoxin productiona
Aspergillus section F lavi A.f lavus Aflatoxin B1
Cyclopiazonic acid
β-nitropropionic acid
A.parasiticus Aflatoxin B1 , B2 , G1 , G2
Aspergillus section N igri A.niger/A.carbonarius Ochratoxin A
P enicillium P enicillium spp.
F usarium F usarium spp. Fumonisin B1 , B2
Alternaria Alternaria spp. Tenuazonic acid
a:adopted from Frisvad and Thrane, (2002).
citrinin on olives kept in tanks is caused by unfa- spices has already been published [66]. Red pep-
vorable conditions. per is one of the spices on which a lot of work
Although the number of moulds and the species related to aflatoxin presence has been done in
of mould isolated from the samples gave the im- Turkey [67-73]. Table 8 presents studies related
pression that contamination was at a low level, to red pepper in Turkey.
when examined in terms of toxins it was obvi- Table 8 indicates the presence of aflatoxin in
ous that they were heavily contaminated with cit- red pepper produced and prepared as powder,
rinin. Therefore, an agricultural product, cannot scaled and isot from different regions. The high-
be evaluated in terms of the mould flora only, par- est value reported in Turkey is 109.7 µg/kg AFB1
ticularly at the post-harvesting stages, the pres- [68]. The maximum value allowed for spices ac-
ence of toxins should also be investigated. cording to the Turkish Food Codex is 5 µg/kg for
Citrinin has a nephrotoxic and immunotoxic AFB1 and 10 µg/kg for total AF [74].
potential [13]. Therefore it is considered that the AFB1 was found in 9% of the fresh red pepper,
presence of citrinin in olives constitutes a hazard 100% of the red-scaled pepper and 90.3% of the
to public health. red pepper powder samples from the Gaziantep
s
and Kahramanmara¸ regions [67].
Aflatoxin B1 , B2 , G1 and G2 were determined
Table 7 in 32 red pepper samples collected from markets
The amount of the mycotoxigenic A. flavus-A. par- ˙
in the Istanbul region and was found that AFB1
asiticus contamination in some agricultural products levels were higher than 5ppb in about 50% of the
in Turkey samples and total AF levels were ≥ 20µg/kg in
Products Aflatoxin pozitif isolates Ref. about 40% of the samples [68].
(%) Aflatoxins were detected using mini column in
Hazelnut 48 [41] 39% of their 13 red pepper samples from the
Pistachio nut 35 [50] g
Tekirda˘ region. They have also reported AFB1
Fig 72 [49] in 70 out of the 79 samples exported to Germany
85 [51] in the previous years and reported that the afla-
67 [52] toxin level exceeded 100 ppb in two of the samples
Red pepper 28 [73] [69].
A total of 36 samples were examined from
different producers of red-scaled pepper grown
in 4 different regions namely Adana, Gaziantep,
s
Kahramanmara¸ and Urfa to determine afla-
7. Red Pepper toxigenic moulds and aflatoxins. The my-
coflora consisted mainly of Aspergillus (56%),
Red pepper is consumed as a spice in various
Eurotium (17%), and Penicillium (16%) species.
forms such as powder, scaled, hot or sweet and
Among the Aspergillus species, Aspergillus sect.
fried (isot). A detailed study on the detection
N igri (17%) and A.flavus (16%) followed by
and control of mycotoxins in red pepper and other
24
The Importance of Mycotoxins and A Brief History of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
Table 8
Mycotoxin studies in red peper in Turkey
Red pepper Method Incidence (positive Mycotoxin References
(Capsicum annuum) samples/total number Max. amount
of samples) (µg/kg)
Red pepper-pod TLC + 3/33 1.45 AFB1 [67]
Fluoresans spectrofotometer
Red-scaled pepper
TLC + 30/30 15.9 AFB1 [67]
Fluoresans spectrofotometer
TLC 20/32 109.7 AFB1 [68]
HPLC 33.1 AFB2
18.8 AFG1
2.0 AFG2
Mini colon 5/13 4− > 10 total AF [69]
TLC 8/44 97.5 AF(B+G) [70]
HPLC 5/36 31.2 AFB1 [71]
Red pepper-powder
TLC + 28/31 28.5 AFB1 [67]
Fluorescence spectrofotometer
TLC 13/30 25.0 AFB1 [72]
1/30 5.15 AFG1
TLC 3/26 16.4 AF(B+G) [70]
ELISA 68/100 40.9 AFB1 [73]
A.sclerotia (12%), Eurotium amstelodami and 8. Conclusions
P .viridicatum were present at 12% and 10.9% re-
spectively. A.f lavus and aflatoxin were not de- Studies carried out in Turkey show the pres-
tected in the 6 isot samples from Urfa. 13 of ence of AFM1 in milk and cheese, AFB1 in hazel
the 30 tested samples were contaminated with nut, citrinin in olives, AFB1 and OTA in figs and
aflatoxigenic A.flavus. Only aflatoxin B1 was de- AFB1 in red pepper, AF, FUM, OTA, DON in
tected in 5 samples (14%) at levels between 10.5- cereals indicate the risk of mycotoxins for the con-
31.2µg/kg [71]. This was higher than the limits sumers. Mycotoxin production can be prevented
of the Turkish Codex. by a systematic study between different disci-
44 red-scaled pepper, 26 red pepper powder plines. Mycotoxin prevention should be consid-
in Erzurum and 20 isot samples from Urfa were ered as a government policy and effort should be
studied using TLC and found that 11.3% red- given to transfer prevention systems to practice.
scaled pepper, 3.8% red pepper and 5% isot con- The application of prevention systems like Good
tained AFB+G exceeded 5ppb [70]. Agricultural Practices, (GAP), Good Manufac-
100 red pepper samples were examined in Is- turing Practices, (GMP), Good Hygenic Prac-
tanbul. AFB1 levels were found higher than the tices (GHP) and Hazard Analyses Critical Con-
legal limits of the Turkish Food Codex (2002) [60] trol Point (HACCP) require systematic educa-
and the European Commission (2002) (>5 µg/kg) tion. Special education programs should be of-
in 18 (18%) red pepper samples (Table 8). The fered to different groups including the farmers.
highest AFB1 level in the samples was 40.9 µg/kg Control is another important topic to be consid-
[73]. ered. Food products offered in the market should
It has been observed that aflatoxin levels fre- be controlled periodically and penalties should be
quently exceed the limits in red pepper (>5 µg/kg enforced on products with mycotoxin levels ex-
AFB1 and 10ppb AF total) and that risks exist ceeding the limits.
for consumers.
25
Dilek Heperkan
References sity, Turkey, 124 (2005).
[17] K. Seyrek, J. of Turk Vet. Medical. Assoc. 72,
[1] E. Anklam and J. Stroka, Proceedings of Int. 55 (2001).
Workshop on Mycotoxin, Univ. of Maryland, cc g
[18] H. Ay¸i¸ek, E. Yarsan, B. Sarımehmeto˘lu and
USA (July, 22-26) (2002). ¸
O. Cakmak, Veterinary and Human Toxicology,
[2] D. Park, Proceedings of Int. Workshop on My- 44, 295 (2002).
cotoxin, Univ. of Maryland, USA (July, 22-26) u u u ou
[19] U. G¨nsen and I. B¨y¨ky¨r¨k, J. Turk Vet
(2002). Anim. Sci. 2, 821 (2003).
[3] L. Stoloff, J Food Prot 49, 262-230 (1980). g
[20] B. Sarımehmeto˘lu, O. Kuplulu and T.H. Celik,
In CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Food Control, 15, 45 (2003).
Technology). Task Force Report No. 139. Ames, u g ¸
[21] M. G¨rses, A. Erdo˘an and B. Cetin, J. T¨rk u
Iowa, USA (2003). Vet. Anim. Sci. 28, 527 (2004).
[4] B.C. Prasongsidh, K. Kailasapathy, G.R. Skur- s
[22] A. Aydın, R. Ba¸kaya, A. Yıldız and K. Bostan,
ray, W.L. Bryden, Food Res. Int. 30, 793 (1997). Proceedings of II. National Mycotoxin Sympo-
[5] WHO / FAO (World Health Organization / sium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. D. Kaya, F. K.
Food and Agricultural Organization of the u
G¨ler, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey
United Nations). WHO Food Additives Series, (May, 23-24) 118 (2005).
Geneva 47, 281 (2001). s
[23] R. Ba¸kaya and M. Atasever, Proceedings of II.
[6] ˙
I. Bakırcı, Food Control, 12, 47 (2001). National Mycotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Hep-
[7] ¸ ¨ s
S. Ozkaya, A. Ba¸aran, T. Kaymak, A. Dik- u
erkan, G. D. Kaya, F. K. G¨ler, Istanbul Techni-
men, M. Kocabey, G. Demirkazık, N.Altındi¸, s cal University, Turkey (May, 23-24) 128 (2005).
R. Ramiz, Part 1, Ministry of Agriculture, Plant [24] J. I. Pitt, In Mycotoxins and Food Safety. Edts.
Protec. and Cont. Dept., Ufuk Publ. 80 (2002). J. W. DeVries, M. W. Trucksess and L. S. Jack-
[8] ¸ ¨ s ¸
S Ozkaya, A. Ba¸aran, F. Topuz, C. Akdemir, son, pp. 29, (Kluwer Academic / Plenum Pub-
¨ u
T. Kaymak, O .F. G¨rer, C. Akbulut, M. Atak, lishers, New York, 2002).
u
M. Erg¨l, Proceedings of I. National Mycotoxin [25] R.A. Samson, E.S. Hoekstra, J.C. Frisvad and
c
Symposium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. Dalkılı¸, H. O. Filtenborg, Introduction to Food-borne Fungi.
¸
Senyuva Istanbul Technical University, Turkey, Centraalbureau Voor Schimmelcultures , Baarn,
93 (2003). The Netherlands. pp.322 (1996).
[9] ¨ ¸ u u u ¨
K. Bostan, O. Cetin, S.K. B¨y¨k¨nal, O. Erg¨n,u [26] D. Bhatnagar, G.A. Payne, T.E. Cleveland,
Proceedings of I. National Mycotoxin Sym- J.F. Robens, In Meeting the Mycotoxin Menace.
posium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. Dalkılı¸, H. c Edts. D.Barug, H.P. Van Egmond, R. Lopez-
¸
Senyuva Istanbul Technical University, Turkey, Garcia, T. Van Osenbruggen and A.Visconti, pp.
176 (2003). 17 (Wageningen Academic Publishers, 2004).
[10] ¸ s
C. Akdemir ve A. Altınta¸, Proceedings of I. [27] K.A. Scudamore, J. Banks, In Meeting the My-
National Mycotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Hep- cotoxin Menace. Edts. D.Barug, H.van Egmond,
c ¸
erkan, G. Dalkılı¸, H. Senyuva Istanbul Techni- R. Lopez-Garcia, T. van Osenbruggen and
cal University, Turkey, 87 (2003). A.Visconti, p.165 (Wageningen Academic Pub-
[11] T. Yurdun, Proceedings of I. National My- lishers, 2004).
cotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. [28] H. K. Frank, Zeits. Ernahrungswiss. 31, 164
c ¸
Dalkılı¸, H. Senyuva Istanbul Technical Univer- (1992).
sity, Turkey, 23 (2003). [29] J. C. Frisvad and U. Thrane, In Introduction
[12] c
H.H. Oru¸, O. Kalkanlı, M. Cengiz and S. Sonal, to Food Borne Fungi. Edts. R.A. Samson, E.S.
Milchwissenschaft, 60, 71 (2005). Hoekstra, J.C. Frisvad, and O. Filtenborg, pp.
[13] CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and 251, 6th edition (Centraalbureau voor Schim-
Technology), Task Force Report No. 139. My- melcultures, Delft, 2002).
cotoxins: Risks in Plant, Animal and Human [30] J.W. Park, E.K. Kim, D.H. Shon and Y.B. Kim,
Systems, Ames, Iowa, USA (2003). Food Addit. Contam. 19, 1073 (2002).
[14] ¨
B. Ozkalp and Y. Durak, Turk J. Biol 22, 341 g
[31] G.Z. Omurtag ve D. Beyo˘lu, Food Addit. Con-
(1998). tam. 20, 405 (2003).
[15] g g s ˙ ¨
G. Da˘o˘lu, O. Kele¸ and M. Yıldırım, I.U. J u us
[32] T. G¨m¨¸, M. Arıcı, M. Demirci, Journal of the
Vet. 21, 313 (1995). Institute of Brewing, 110, 146 (2004).
[16] c
H.H. Oru¸ and S. Sonal, Vet. Human. Toxicol. ¨
[33] G. Ozay and D. Heperkan, Mycotoxin Res. 5, 81
c
43, 292 (2001). In H.H. Oru¸, O. Kalkanlı, M. (1989).
Cengiz and S. Sonal, Proceedings of I. National g
[34] G.Z. Omurtag and D. Yazıcıo˘lu, Food Addit.
Mycotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. Contam. 18, 844 (2001).
c ¸
Dalkılı¸, H. Senyuva Istanbul Technical Univer-
26
The Importance of Mycotoxins and A Brief History of Mycotoxin Studies in Turkey
[35] G.Z. Omurtag, J. Food Protection. 64, 1072 [54] C.N. Heenan, K.J. Shaw, J.I. Pitt, J.Food My-
(2001). col. 1, 67 (1998).
¸ s
[36] O. Sim¸ek, C. Demir, M. Arıcı, Vorkom- [55] P.G. Mantle and A.M. Chow, Int. J. Food Mi-
men von Fumonisine in Mais in der T¨rkei. u crobiology 56, 105 (2000).
24. Mykotoxin-Workshop, Berlin, June 03-05 [56] A. Mahjoub and L.B. Bullerman, J. Food Prot.
(2002). 50, 959 (1987).
g g u us
[37] M. Arıcı, O. Da˘lio˘lu, T. G¨m¨¸, F. Daglioglu, [57] R. Eltem, Int. J. Food Microbiol. 32, 217 (1996).
Acta Alimentaria, 33, 325 (2004). [58] D. Leontopoulos, A. Siafaka, P. Markaki, Food
u us
[38] M. Arıcı, T. G¨m¨¸, F. Atansay, M. Turan, Microbiol. 20, 119 (2003).
s g
A. Kuba¸, O. Gaytancıo˘lu, Agroenviron 2000, [59] G. Toussaint, F. Lafaverges and E.A. Walker,
2nd International Symposium on New Technolo- Arch. Inst. Pasteur, Tunis. 3-4, 325 (1997).
gies for Environmental Monitoring and Agro- [60] E. Daradimos, P. Markaki, and M. Koupparis,
Application, 446, Tekirdag, (2000). Food Addit. Contam. 17, 65 (2000).
[39] A. Visconti, Mycotoxicology newsletter. Ins of [61] H. Gourama, and L.B. Bullerman, Int. J. Food
Sci. of Food Production (ISPA) (CNR)-Bari, Microbiol. 1, 81 (1987).
Italy, Bulletin 6p. Vol VIII (2004). a
[62] M. Arıcı, Ern¨hrung. 24, 257 (2000).
[40] D. Heperkan, Proceedings of I. National My- [63] J. Oral and D. Heperkan, Proceedings of the 17th
cotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. International ICFMH Conference. Edts. A.C.J.
c ¸
Dalkılı¸, H. Senyuva Istanbul Technical Univer- Tuijtelaars, R.A. Samson, F.M. Rombouts, S.
sity, Turkey, 1 (2003). Notermans, Veldhoven, The Netherlands, pp.
[41] D. Heperkan, Proceedings and abstract book 138 (1999).
of the 3rd Balkan Conference of Microbiology. [64] D. Heperkan, B.E. Meric, G. Sismanoglu, G.
¨
Edts. M. Uzun, Z. Erturan, O. Ang, (September Dalkilic, and F.K. Guler, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol.
˙
4-6) Istanbul. 109 (2003). 571, 203 (2006).
[42] D. Eke ve D. G¨ktan, Gıda Sanayii, 4:36, 38, 42
o ˙ ¸ s g g
[65] I. Sahin, F. Ba¸o˘lu, M. Korukluo˘lu and D.
(1987). o¸ u
G¨cmen, K¨kem Dergisi 22, 1 (1999).
¸ s
[43] O. Sim¸ek, M. Arici, C. Demir, Nahrung/Food, [66] D. Heperkan, In Handbook of Herbs and Spices
46 , 194 (2002). Vol.3. Edt. K.V.Peter, pp. 1-28 (Woodhead Pub-
[44] Personal communication with Private Sector. lishing Limited, 2006).
c c
[45] M Alu¸ ve S. Alu¸, Proceedings of I. National s s
[67] E.E. Tayda¸ and O. A¸kın, Gıda 20, 3 (1995).
Mycotoxin Symposium, Edts. D. Heperkan, G. [68] G.Z. Omurtag, G. Atak, T. Yurdun and O. Er-¨
c ¸
Dalkılı¸, H. Senyuva, Istanbul Technical Univer- soy, Acta Pharmac. Turcica. 3, 125 (1998).
sity, Turkey, (September 18-19) 60 (2003). [69] H. Dıraman and M. Arıcı, Gıda 12, 41 (1999).
[46] Anon, EC No 2174/2003 (2003). g
[70] A. Erdo˘an, Chemosphere. 56, 321 (2004).
[47] J.A. Samson, Tropical fruits, 2 nd ed. Tropical ¨ s
[71] D. Heperkan and O.C. Ermi¸, In Meeting
Agricultural series (London, Longman,1986). the Mycotoxin Menace. Edts. D.Barug, H.van
[48] P.J. Mathot, Int Symposium on Dried Figs and Egmond, R. Lopez-Garcia, T. van Osenbruggen
Aflatoxin. Izmir, Turkey (April, 4-8), (1989). and A.Visconti, pp. 197-219, (Wageningen Aca-
[49] D. Heperkan, Int Symposium on Dried Figs and demic Publishers, 2004).
Aflatoxin. Izmir, Turkey (April, 4-8), (1989). [72] C. Dokuzlu, J. Fac. Vet. Med. 20, 19 (2001).
[50] D. Heperkan, N. Aran and M. Ayfer, J. Sci.Food s
[73] A. Aydin, M. Emin Erkan, R. Ba¸kaya, G. Cift-
Agric. 66, 273 (1994). g
cio˘lu. Food Control. (2006). Accepted for pub-
s ¨ os
[51] O. A¸kın and O. K¨¸ker, Studies on the forma- lication.
¨
tion of aflatoxin in figs. BSc Thesis, A.U. Press, [74] Turkish Food Codex Regulation. Legislation on
226 (1980). the determination of maximum levels of con-
o u
[52] M. Karapınar and D. G¨n¨l, Symposium on taminants in food products. Official Gazete, 23
Moulds and Mycotoxins in foodstuffs, Istanbul. September 2002, No: 24885 (2002).
(1989).
¨
[53] G. Ozay and I. Alperden, Mycotoxin Research.
7, 85 (1991).
27
