Mycotoxin Hazards and Regulations Impacts on Food and Animal Feed Crop Trade Erik Dohlman1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Mycotoxin Hazards and Regulations Impacts on Food and Animal Feed Crop Trade Erik Dohlman1 Chapter 6 Mycotoxin Hazards and Regulations Impacts on Food and Animal Feed Crop Trade Erik Dohlman1 Summary ● One study estimated that crop losses (corn, wheat, and peanuts) from mycotoxin contamination in the he risk of contamination by mycotoxins is an United States amount to $932 million annually, in important food safety concern for grains and addition to losses averaging $466 million annually Tother field crops. Mycotoxins are toxic byprod- from regulatory enforcement, testing, and other ucts of mold infestations affecting as much as one-quar- quality control measures (CAST, 2003). ter of global food and feed crop output. Food ● Wilson and Otsuki (2001) estimated that, for a contaminated with mycotoxins, particularly with afla- group of 46 countries—including the United toxins, a subcategory, can cause sometimes-fatal acute States—the adoption of a uniform aflatoxin stan- illness, and are associated with increased cancer risk. dard based on international Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) guidelines would increase To protect consumers from these health risks, many trade of cereals (grains) and nuts by more than $6 countries have adopted regulations to limit exposure billion, or more than 50 percent, compared with to mycotoxins. As with many food safety regulations, the divergent standards in effect during 1998. domestic and trade regimes governing mycotoxins often take the form of product, rather than process, stan- There are several reasons why trade disputes related to dards. The World Trade Organization’s Sanitary and the setting of regulatory standards on mycotoxins could Phytosanitary Agreement states that these standards must persist, or even worsen. First, mycotoxin contamination be based on sound risk assessments. However, diverging is recognized as an unavoidable risk. Codex, for exam- perceptions of tolerable health risks—associated largely ple, notes that many factors that influence the level of with the level of economic development and the suscep- contamination in cereals and grains are environmental— tibility of a nation’s crops to contamination—have led to such as weather and insect infestation—and therefore are widely varying standards among different national or difficult or impossible to control. Second, perceptions of multilateral agencies. For example, of the 48 countries tolerable health risks are not likely to narrow signifi- with established limits for total aflatoxins in food, stan- cantly in the near future since they appear to hinge dards ranged from 0 to 50 parts per billion. largely on the level of economic development and the susceptibility of a nation’s crops to contamination. In the United States, aflatoxins are not commonly cited Finally, under the “precautionary principle,” some coun- as a reason for import “refusals” by the Food and Drug tries may set new standards on certain mycotoxins for Administration (FDA), the Federal agency that enforces which scientific evidence of a health risk is unclear.2 mycotoxin regulations. In 2001, only 4 of 1,781 FDA import detentions of cereals (grain) and cereal products One strategy to lower both the health risks and the (which include consumer-ready processed products) economic costs associated with mycotoxins is to were due to aflatoxins, although detentions were more increase awareness among food producers and han- common for contamination of nut and seed imports. dlers of practices which would minimize mycotoxin Nevertheless, several studies indicate that the economic contamination, and to encourage the adoption of costs of enforcing standards, and the lost trade opportu- process-based guidelines such as good agricultural nities stemming from unharmonized global product stan- practices (GAPs) or good manufacturing practices dards on mycotoxins, are substantial: (GMPs). 2 The "precautionary principle" is a term referring to the use of 1 Agricultural economist with the Market and Trade Economics environmental or health precautions in situations where the extent Division, Economic Research Service, USDA. or source of a particular risk is unclear. Economic Research Service/USDA International Trade and Food Safety / AER-828 ● 97 Introduction common in African, Asian, and South American coun- tries with warm and humid climates, but also occurs in temperate areas of North America and Europe. These Concerns about human health arise when grains and five groups of mycotoxins all pose health concerns and other field crops are found to contain unsafe chemicals, are subject to SPS or other regulatory measures. additives, or other contaminants. Many countries have established sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regulations The fungi (mold) that produce mycotoxins can emerge to protect consumers from these health risks, while either in the field (in soil, decaying vegetation, and seeking to balance health benefits with the potential grains undergoing microbiological deterioration) or trade disruptions, economic losses, and market uncer- during postharvest transportation or storage. tainties that regulations can cause. Among grains and Temperature stress is an important cause of fungi other field crops, perhaps the most prevalent—if pub- growth on crops in the field, and high moisture content licly unrecognized—source of food-related health risks (water activity) and temperature are associated with are naturally occurring poisonous substances called the growth of fungi in stored grain. Detection and con- mycotoxins. Consuming grains or other foods contami- trol of the fungi is a continuous concern since the nated with certain mycotoxins can be fatal if the toxins fungi can become established and remain with the are present at very high levels. Long-term exposure to commodity anywhere along the production, storage, mycotoxins can increase cancer risk, and suppress the transportation, and processing chain. A further concern immune system, among other health problems. is that the absence of visible mold does not guarantee the grain is free from mycotoxin, and cooking or pro- Although humans face health risks stemming from the cessing the food product does not necessarily rid it of contamination of grains with other naturally occurring mycotoxin contamination. For example, molds con- substances, mycotoxins are unique in that they are pro- taminated with aflatoxins have been isolated in duced naturally on the grain, and their presence (at least processed food products such as bread, macaroni, initially) is usually associated with uncontrollable factors cooked meat, cheese, and flour (Guerzoni, 1999). such as climatic conditions.3 The presence of mycotox- ins can also be distinguished from plant infestations that For the consumer, a food safety concern is potential affect grains—such as TCK smut and Karnal bunt infes- exposure to mycotoxins through consumption of food tations which are still subject to SPS-related import con- from contaminated crops, which can produce acute trols designed to protect the quality of domestically and/or long-term health problems. Consuming food produced crops—but pose no food safety risk. products that contain high levels of certain mycotoxins can cause the rapid onset of mycotoxicosis, a severe ill- Mycotoxins are produced by certain fungi (e.g., ness characterized by vomiting, abdominal pain, pul- Aspergillus ssp., Penicillium ssp., and Fusarium ssp.) monary edema, convulsions, coma, and in rare cases, that grow on human food and animal feed ingredients death. Although lethal cases are uncommon, acute ill- such as corn, sorghum, wheat, barley, peanuts, and nesses from mycotoxins, particularly aflatoxins (aflatoxi- other legumes and oilseeds. Five broad groups of cosis), have been reported from many parts of the world, mycotoxins—aflatoxin, vomitoxin, ochratoxin A, usually in developing countries. Some notable outbreaks fumonisin, and zearalenone—are commonly found in include the deaths of 3 Taiwanese in 1967, and the food and feed grains (table 6.1). Among mycotoxins, deaths of more than 100 people in Northwest India in probably the most widely recognized risk comes from 1974. Both outbreaks were attributed to aflatoxin con- aflatoxins. Aflatoxins are extremely potent carcino- tamination, of rice in Taiwan and corn in India. genic and mutagenic substances that first came into the Vomitoxin was responsible for another large-scale inci- public spotlight—and were formally identified—in the dent of mycotoxicosis in India in 1988. early 1960s following the deaths of more than 100,000 young turkeys on a poultry farm in England. The so- Although more difficult to directly associate with called Turkey X disease was eventually tied to high mycotoxin contamination, an equal, or perhaps even levels of aflatoxin in Brazilian peanut meal imported greater, food safety concern than acute illness is the as a feed ingredient. Aflatoxin contamination is most long-term effects of lower-level mycotoxin consump- tion, particularly the risks of cancer and immune defi- 3 For example, dioxins also occur naturally—sometimes as a result ciency. Aflatoxin B1 was placed on the list of known of forest fires or volcanic eruptions—but they are often the human carcinogens by the International Agency for byproduct of industrial processes (see chapter 8). 98 ● International Trade and Food Safety / AER-828 Economic Research Service/USDA Table 6.1—Common mycotoxins, commodity affected, and health effects Mycotoxin Commodities Fungal source(s) Effects of ingestion Aflatoxin B1, B2 Corn, peanuts, and many Aspergillus flavus Aflatoxin B1 identified as potent human
Recommended publications
  • Characterization and Antimicrobial Resistance of Listeria Monocytogenes Isolated from Food-Related Environments
    PEER-REVIEWED ARTICLE Dongryeoul Bae,1 Ronald D. Smiley,2 3 1* Food Protection Trends, Vol 36, No. 5, p.357–361 Ezat H. Mezal and Ashraf A. Khan Copyright© 2016, International Association for Food Protection 6200 Aurora Ave., Suite 200W, Des Moines, IA 50322-2864 1*Division of Microbiology, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA 2Arkansas Regional Laboratory, Office of Regulatory Affairs, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AR 72079, USA 3Dept. of Biology, University of Thi-Qar, Thi-Qar, Iraq Food Products and Processing Facilities Linked to Recent Outbreaks of Listeriosis in the US Frozen Vegetables (2016, WA) Cheeses (2013, WI) Raw Milk Caramel Apples Soy Products (2016, PA) (2014 – 2015, CA) (2014, IL) Packaged Salads Dairy Products (2016, OH) (2014, DE) Caramel Apples (2014 – 2015, MO) Soft Cheese Ice Cream (2015, CA) (2015, OK) Ice Cream (2015, AL) Ice Cream Product (2015, TX) Soft Cheese (2014, FL) Data source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention www.cdc.gov/listeria/outbreaks/index,html Characterization and Antimicrobial Resistance of Listeria monocytogenes Isolated from Food-related Environments ABSTRACT streptomycin and tetracycline. No strain was resist- The purpose of this study was to determine the ant to 3 or more antimicrobial classes. All tetracy- diversity and antimicrobial resistance of Listeria cline-resistant strains were serotype 1/2a, and only monocytogenes strains isolated from food-related tetM was amplified from the chromosomal DNA. This environments in the United States. Nineteen unre- study, which reports the genetic diversity and anti- lated strains of L.
    [Show full text]
  • Control of Listeria Monocytogenes in Ready-To-Eat Foods: Guidance for Industry Draft Guidance
    Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Control of Listeria monocytogenes in Ready-To-Eat Foods: Guidance for Industry Draft Guidance This guidance is being distributed for comment purposes only. Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR 10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that FDA considers your comment on this draft guidance before we begin work on the final version of the guidance, submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance within 180 days of publication in the Federal Register of the notice announcing the availability of the draft guidance. Submit electronic comments to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number FDA–2007–D–0494 listed in the notice of availability that publishes in the Federal Register. For questions regarding this draft document contact the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) at 240-402-1700. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition January 2017 Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Table of Contents I. Introduction II. Background A. Regulatory Framework B. Characteristics of L. monocytogenes C. L. monocytogenes in the Food Processing Environment III. How to Apply This Guidance to Your Operations Based on the Regulatory Framework That Applies to Your Food Establishment IV. Controls on Personnel A. Hands, Gloves and Footwear B. Foamers, Footbaths, and Dry Powdered Sanitizers C. Clothing D. Controls on Personnel Associated with Specific Areas in the Plant E.
    [Show full text]
  • Detoxification Strategies for Zearalenone Using
    microorganisms Review Detoxification Strategies for Zearalenone Using Microorganisms: A Review 1, 2, 1 1, Nan Wang y, Weiwei Wu y, Jiawen Pan and Miao Long * 1 Key Laboratory of Zoonosis of Liaoning Province, College of Animal Science & Veterinary Medicine, Shenyang Agricultural University, Shenyang 110866, China 2 Institute of Animal Science, Xinjiang Academy of Animal Sciences, Urumqi 830000, China * Correspondence: [email protected] or [email protected] These authors contributed equally to this work. y Received: 21 June 2019; Accepted: 19 July 2019; Published: 21 July 2019 Abstract: Zearalenone (ZEA) is a mycotoxin produced by Fusarium fungi that is commonly found in cereal crops. ZEA has an estrogen-like effect which affects the reproductive function of animals. It also damages the liver and kidneys and reduces immune function which leads to cytotoxicity and immunotoxicity. At present, the detoxification of mycotoxins is mainly accomplished using biological methods. Microbial-based methods involve zearalenone conversion or adsorption, but not all transformation products are nontoxic. In this paper, the non-pathogenic microorganisms which have been found to detoxify ZEA in recent years are summarized. Then, two mechanisms by which ZEA can be detoxified (adsorption and biotransformation) are discussed in more detail. The compounds produced by the subsequent degradation of ZEA and the heterogeneous expression of ZEA-degrading enzymes are also analyzed. The development trends in the use of probiotics as a ZEA detoxification strategy are also evaluated. The overall purpose of this paper is to provide a reliable reference strategy for the biological detoxification of ZEA. Keywords: zearalenone (ZEA); reproductive toxicity; cytotoxicity; immunotoxicity; biological detoxification; probiotics; ZEA biotransformation 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Interactions of Insecticidal Spider Peptide Neurotoxins with Insect Voltage- and Neurotransmitter-Gated Ion Channels
    Interactions of insecticidal spider peptide neurotoxins with insect voltage- and neurotransmitter-gated ion channels (Molecular representation of - HXTX-Hv1c including key binding residues, adapted from Gunning et al, 2008) PhD Thesis Monique J. Windley UTS 2012 CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORSHIP/ORIGINALITY I certify that the work in this thesis has not previously been submitted for a degree nor has it been submitted as part of requirements for a degree except as fully acknowledged within the text. I also certify that the thesis has been written by me. Any help that I have received in my research work and the preparation of the thesis itself has been acknowledged. In addition, I certify that all information sources and literature used are indicated in the thesis. Monique J. Windley 2012 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people who I would like to thank for contributions made towards the completion of this thesis. Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisor Prof. Graham Nicholson for his guidance and persistence throughout this project. I would like to acknowledge his invaluable advice, encouragement and his neverending determination to find a solution to any problem. He has been a valuable mentor and has contributed immensely to the success of this project. Next I would like to thank everyone at UTS who assisted in the advancement of this research. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge Phil Laurance for his assistance in the repair and modification of laboratory equipment. To all the laboratory and technical staff, particulary Harry Simpson and Stan Yiu for the restoration and sourcing of equipment - thankyou. I would like to thank Dr Mike Johnson for his continual assistance, advice and cheerful disposition.
    [Show full text]
  • Feed Safety 2016
    Annual Report The surveillance programme for feed materials, complete and complementary feed in Norway 2016 - Mycotoxins, fungi and bacteria NORWEGIAN VETERINARY INSTITUTE The surveillance programme for feed materials, complete and complementary feed in Norway 2016 – Mycotoxins, fungi and bacteria Content Summary ...................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4 Aims ........................................................................................................................... 5 Materials and methods ..................................................................................................... 5 Quantitative determination of total mould, Fusarium and storage fungi ........................................ 6 Chemical analysis .......................................................................................................... 6 Bacterial analysis .......................................................................................................... 7 Statistical analysis ......................................................................................................... 7 Results and discussion ...................................................................................................... 7 Cereals .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Food Safety, Everyone's Business
    7 June 2019 World Food Safety Day Food safety, everyone’s business A Guide to World Food Safety Day 2019 Get Started! The first ever World Food Safety Day (WFSD) will be celebrated on 7 June 2019 to draw attention and inspire action to help prevent, detect and manage foodborne risks, contributing to food security, human health, economic prosperity, agriculture, market access, tourism and sustainable development. Theme “Food safety, everyone’s business” Everyone has the right to safe, nutritious and sufficient food. Still today, almost one in ten people in the world fall ill after eating contaminated food. When food is not safe, children cannot learn, adults cannot work. Human development cannot take place. Safe food is critical to promoting health and ending hunger, two of the primary goals of the 2030 Agenda. There is no food security without food safety and in a world where the food supply chain has become more complex, any adverse food safety incident may have global negative effects on public health, trade and the economy. Yet food safety is taken for granted. It is often invisible until you get food poisoning. Unsafe food containing harmful bacteria, viruses, parasites or chemical substances, causes more than 200 diseases – ranging from diarrhoea to cancer. This international day is an opportunity to strengthen efforts to ensure that the food we eat is safe. Whether you produce, process, sell or prepare food, then you have a role in keeping it safe. Everybody along the food chain is responsible for food safety. For this inaugural WFSD all stakeholders are invited to raise global awareness about food safety in general and to highlight that everyone involved in food systems has a part to play.
    [Show full text]
  • Mycotoxins: a Review of Dairy Concerns
    Mycotoxins: A Review of Dairy Concerns L. W. Whitlow, Department of Animal Science and W. M. Hagler, Jr., Department of Poultry Science North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695 Introduction mycotoxins such as the ergots are known to affect cattle and may be prevalent at times in certain feedstuffs. Molds are filamentous (fuzzy or dusty looking) fungi that occur in many feedstuffs including roughages and There are hundreds of different mycotoxins, which are concentrates. Molds can infect dairy cattle, especially diverse in their chemistry and effects on animals. It is during stressful periods when they are immune likely that contaminated feeds will contain more than one suppressed, causing a disease referred to as mycosis. mycotoxin. This paper is directed toward those Molds also produce poisons called mycotoxins that affect mycotoxins thought to occur most frequently at animals when they consume mycotoxin contaminated concentrations toxic to dairy cattle. A more extensive feeds. This disorder is called mycotoxicosis. Mycotoxins review is available in the popular press (Whitlow and are produced by a wide range of different molds and are Hagler, 2004). classified as secondary metabolites, meaning that their function is not essential to the mold’s existence. The Major toxigenic fungi and mycotoxins thought to be U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has the most prevalent and potentially toxic to dairy cattle. estimated that worldwide, about 25% of crops are affected annually with mycotoxins (Jelinek, 1987). Such surveys Fungal genera Mycotoxins reveal sufficiently high occurrences and concentrations of Aspergillus Aflatoxin, Ochratoxin, mycotoxins to suggest that mycotoxins are a constant Sterigmatocystin, Fumitremorgens, concern.
    [Show full text]
  • New Markers in the Mycotox Profile
    New Markers in the MycoTOX Profile We are happy to announce the addition of four new mycotoxin markers to our MycoTOX Profile. The test now includes 11 mycotoxins from 40 species of mold, making it by far the most comprehensive and competitively priced mycotoxin test available. It also still more sensitive and accurate than other tests available, because we use LC/MS/MS technology. Here is an overview of the four new mycotoxin markers: Gliotoxin Gliotoxin (GTX) is produced by the mold genus Aspergillus. Aspergillus spreads in the environment by releasing conidia which are capable of infiltrating the small alveolar airways of individuals. In order to evade the body’s defenses Aspergillus releases Gliotoxin to inhibit the immune system. One of the targets of Gliotoxin is PtdIns (3,4,5) P3. This results in the downregulation of phagocytic immune defense, which can lead to the exacerbation of polymicrobial infections. Gliotoxin impairs the activation of T-cells and induces apoptosis in monocytes and in monocyte-derived dendritic cells. These impairments can lead to multiple neurological syndromes. Mycophenolic Acid Mycophenolic Acid (MPA) produced by the Penicillium fungus. MPA is an immunosuppressant which inhibits the proliferation of B and T lymphocytes. MPA exposure can increase the risk of opportunistic infections such as Clostridia and Candida. MPA is associated with miscarriage and congenital malformations when the woman is exposed in pregnancy. Dihydrocitrinone Dihydrocitrinone is a metabolite of Citrinin (CTN), which is a mycotoxin that is produced by the mold species Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Monascus. CTN exposure can lead to nephropathy, because of its ability to increase permeability of mitochondrial membranes in the kidneys.
    [Show full text]
  • Occurrence, Impact on Agriculture, Human Health, and Management Strategies of Zearalenone in Food and Feed: a Review
    toxins Review Occurrence, Impact on Agriculture, Human Health, and Management Strategies of Zearalenone in Food and Feed: A Review Dipendra Kumar Mahato 1 , Sheetal Devi 2, Shikha Pandhi 3, Bharti Sharma 3 , Kamlesh Kumar Maurya 3, Sadhna Mishra 3, Kajal Dhawan 4, Raman Selvakumar 5 , Madhu Kamle 6 , Awdhesh Kumar Mishra 7,* and Pradeep Kumar 6,* 1 CASS Food Research Centre, School of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC 3125, Australia; [email protected] 2 National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management (NIFTEM), Sonipat, Haryana 131028, India; [email protected] 3 Department of Dairy Science and Food Technology, Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi 221005, India; [email protected] (S.P.); [email protected] (B.S.); [email protected] (K.K.M.); [email protected] (S.M.) 4 Department of Food Technology and Nutrition, School of Agriculture Lovely Professional University, Phagwara 144411, India; [email protected] 5 Centre for Protected Cultivation Technology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa Campus, New Delhi 110012, India; [email protected] 6 Applied Microbiology Lab., Department of Forestry, North Eastern Regional Institute of Science and Technology, Nirjuli 791109, India; [email protected] 7 Department of Biotechnology, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan 38541, Gyeongbuk, Korea * Correspondence: [email protected] (A.K.M.); [email protected] (P.K.) Citation: Mahato, D.K.; Devi, S.; Abstract: Mycotoxins represent an assorted range of secondary fungal metabolites that extensively Pandhi, S.; Sharma, B.; Maurya, K.K.; occur in numerous food and feed ingredients at any stage during pre- and post-harvest conditions. Mishra, S.; Dhawan, K.; Selvakumar, Zearalenone (ZEN), a mycotoxin categorized as a xenoestrogen poses structural similarity with R.; Kamle, M.; Mishra, A.K.; et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Worldwide Regulations for Mycotoxins in Food and Feed 2003
    FAO Worldwide Regulations Food and for mycotoxins in food Nutrition Paper and feed 2003 81 A F O F S I I A N T P A Contents List of Figures ........................................................................................................................................ iv List of Tables........................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................ vi Foreword ............................................................................................................................................... vii Abbreviations .......................................................................................................................................viii Explanatory note ..................................................................................................................................... x 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Factors affecting the constitution of mycotoxin regulations in food and feed .............................. 3 2.1 Hazard identification and hazard characterization................................................................. 3 2.2 Exposure assessment.............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Aflatoxins and Dairy Cattle
    Texas Dairy Matters Higher Education Supporting the Industry AFLATOXINS AND DAIRY CATTLE Ellen R. Jordan, Ph.D. Extension Dairy Specialist Department of Animal Science Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service The Texas A&M University System Whenever crops are under stress, the potential for aflatoxins increases. Aflatoxins are poisonous by-products of the growth of some species of the mold fungus Aspergillus. Some crops may be contaminated with aflatoxins, particularly whenever drought stress occurs. When lactating animals are fed aflatoxin contaminated feed, they excrete aflatoxin metabolites into the milk. The aflatoxins are capable of causing aflatoxicosis in consumers of milk. This is why government regulations specify that milk must be free of aflatoxin. However, action is not taken until the aflatoxin level exceeds 0.5 ppb in market milk, the level below which there is no hazard for the consuming public. "Action levels" for livestock represent the level of contamination at which the feed may be injurious to their health or result in contamination of milk, meat or eggs. Action levels by class of livestock are in table 1. Aflatoxicosis is a disease caused by the consumption of aflatoxins, the mold metabolites produced by some strains of Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasitisus. The four most common aflatoxins are B1, B2, G1 and G2. Contaminated grains and grain by- products are the most common sources of aflatoxins in Texas. Corn silage may also be a source of aflatoxins, because the ensiling process does not destroy the toxins already present in silage. Aspergillus flavus growth on corn. Table 1: The FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine "Action" levels for aflatoxin in feed grain in interstate commerce.
    [Show full text]
  • Foodcore Salmonella, Shiga Toxin-Producing E. Coli, and Listeria
    FoodCORE Norovirus, Other, and Unknown (NOU) Metrics Rationale and Intent The FoodCORE performance metrics are a list of measurable activities covering diverse aspects of outbreak response. These activities span from outbreak surveillance and detection through investigation, response, control, and prevention measures. Using the metrics*, each center provides data about the burden, timeliness, and completeness of foodborne disease activities related to the key areas of activity. The rationale and intent of these metrics are for investigation activities for norovirus, other enteric disease pathogens, such as Campylobacter, Cryptosporidium, or Giardia, and outbreaks of unknown etiology. Collectively, these are referred to as the NOU metrics, for norovirus, other etiologies, and unknown etiologies. Other etiologies are enteric illnesses with determined etiology that are not Salmonella, Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli, Listeria, or norovirus. Unknown etiologies are enteric illness with no determined/identified etiology from case, product, or environmental testing to indicate the etiologic agent. This can be because no specimen or sample yielded an isolate or other positive result, and would also include investigations where no specimens or samples were collected. Sections Total NOU Investigations ................................2 Laboratory-based Metrics ...............................2 Investigation-based Metrics .............................4 Outbreak-based Metrics .................................6 Norovirus Campylobacter Unknown
    [Show full text]