Skip to content

Advertisement

  • Research article
  • Open Access

An investigation into aflatoxin M 1 in slaughtered fattening pigs and awareness of aflatoxins in Vietnam

BMC Veterinary ResearchBMC series – open, inclusive and trusted201713:363

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-017-1297-8

Received: 6 April 2017

Accepted: 22 November 2017

Published: 28 November 2017

Abstract

Background

Aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) is a hydroxylated metabolite formed after aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) is consumed by humans and animals; it can be detected in urine, milk and blood. It is well recognized that AFB1 is toxic to humans and other animals. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies aflatoxins as group 1 carcinogens and AFM1 as group 2B carcinogen. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the exposure of pigs to aflatoxins as well as to assess the public awareness of aflatoxins among people in five provinces in Vietnam.

Results

A total of 1920 urine samples were collected from slaughterhouses located in five provinces. Overall, the positive rate of AFM1 was 53.90% (95% confidence interval 51.64–56.15) using a cut-off of 0.15 μg/kg (range: limit of detection to 13.66 μg/kg, median: 0.2 μg/kg and mean: 0.63 μg/kg). A total of 252 people from the general population were interviewed from 5 provinces, and overall 67.86% reported being aware of aflatoxins. We also found that men and more highly educated had significantly increased awareness of aflatoxins compared to the females and primary/secondary school group. The respective odds ratios (ORs) were as follows: “male” group (OR: 2.64), “high school educated” group (OR: 3.40) and “college/university or more educated” group (OR: 10.20).

Conclusions

We can conclude that pigs in Vietnam are exposed to aflatoxins to varying degrees, and there may be a risk that pork products could contain AFM1. Further investigation is needed into the possible health impacts as well as to aid in establishing regulations for animal feed to reduce the health impacts in humans and animals.

Keywords

VietnamELISAPigUrineAflatoxinsSurveyPerception/knowledge

Background

Aflatoxins are natural toxic metabolites of Aspergillus spp. (A. flavus and A. parasiticus) [13]; they may occur in a wide range of food commodities, and some, such as peanuts, maize and nuts are especially prone to contamination [46]. Aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) is a hydroxylated metabolite of aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) produced in humans and other animals that consume contaminated food, and can be detected in urine, milk and blood [710]. It is well recognized that AFB1 is toxic to humans and other animals. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies aflatoxins as group 1 carcinogens and AFM1 as group 2B carcinogen [1114]. Human exposure to aflatoxins can occur via consumption of agricultural products (such as maize, rice, peanuts and nuts etc.) or following consumption of dairy products (such as milk, cheese and yoghurt), meat and eggs produced by livestock exposed to aflatoxins [1517]. Long-term exposure to aflatoxins is a major risk factor for liver cancer [18]. In animals, chronic exposure to aflatoxins is associated with weight loss and reproductive problems [1921]. Particularly in pigs, the associated clinical signs are lethargy, hypothermia and icterus [2224]. The main effect of aflatoxin exposure in pigs, however, is reduction in feed intake and average daily weight gain [19, 25, 26].

Vietnam is a tropical country which is hot and humid, providing favorable conditions for fungal growth [27, 28]. Some studies have been conducted to assess AFB1contamination in agricultural products in Vietnam. One study found AFB1 in 83.3–100% of pig feed products [29]. Other studies reported AFB1 in rice, cassava and maize [4, 28, 30].

However, to our knowledge, few studies have been conducted to evaluate the concentrations of AFM1 in pig urine in Vietnam as well as to assess the perception and knowledge of aflatoxins. One study in two pigs found only up to 16% of a dose of AFB1 fed to the animals could be detected in the urine [31]. In another pig trial in Vietnam, approximately 23% of ingested AFB1 was converted to AFM1 and excreted in the urine [32]. Another older study found that the average AFM1 concentration in pig urine was 2.29 ng/ml after feeding 12.7 μg/kg AFB1 over 12 weeks [33]. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to evaluate the concentrations of AFM1 in the urine of pigs slaughtered for human consumption and to assess public awareness of aflatoxins among the general population in five provinces in Vietnam.

Methods

Study locations and data collection

Vietnam’s climate shows much variation because of its geography (Fig. 1). According to the Köppen-Geiger classification, the climate of southern Vietnam is mainly ‘tropical wet dry’, northern Vietnam has a “humid subtropical” climate and most of the middle and the extreme south are “tropical monsoonal” (Table 1) [34]. Vietnam is commonly divided into eight ecological zones based on geographical features and climatic conditions [35]. Here, the provinces were selected based on high maize production and to represent different ecological and climatic zones.
Figure 1
Fig. 1

Selected sampling districts (dark blue) within each province (light blue)

Table 1

Climate classification and ecological region of each province

Province

Köppen climate classification

Ecological region

Hanoi

Cw: Humid subtropical

Red River Delta

Son La

Cw: Humid subtropical

North West

Nghe An

Aw: Tropical wet dry, and Am: tropical monsoonal

North Central Coast

Dak Lak

Aw: tropical wet dry

Central Highlands

An Giang

Aw: Tropical wet dry

Mekong River Delta

Urine samples were collected from slaughtered fattening pigs (mostly 6–9 months old and weighing 60–120 kg; 11 pigs were out of range) in five provinces (Son La, Hanoi, Nghe An, Dak Lak and An Giang) between January and early June 2016. The sample size was calculated based on 50% prevalence, a precision level of 5% and 95% confidence interval. At least 385 samples per province were collected using multi-stage sampling (province-district-commune). For each province, a total of 25 communes (5 communes per district) were selected from 5 districts based on the availability of pig slaughterhouses. Within the commune, 15–16 samples were randomly collected from more than one slaughterhouse (Fig. 1). Before collecting the samples, it was confirmed that the pigs had been raised in the selected province only. Data were collected on the sex and breed of the pigs. In communes where pigs were sampled, households and pedestrians close to the slaughterhouses were selected by convenience sampling and interviewed in Vietnamese to assess their awareness of aflatoxins.

Laboratory analysis

All urine samples were immediately placed in cool boxes at the slaughterhouses and stored at −20 °C at local laboratories until transportation to the National Institute of Veterinary Research (NIVR) in Hanoi where they were analyzed. Prior to the analysis, all samples were thawed and centrifuged at 3000 g for 5 min to eliminate debris and then supernatant was used for the determination of AFM1 levels. The concentration of AFM1 was determined using a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Helica Biosystems Inc., Santa Ana, CA. USA). This commercial ELISA has been specifically developed and validated for urine testing, and has been used in many previous studies. We followed all the procedures based on the protocol provided by the manufacturer. Finally, the optical density (OD) of the sample was compared to a standard curve, and then each sample level (μg/kg) was determined based on the regression equation. The standard curve covers 150–4000 ppt. A cut-off level of 0.15 μg/kg [(limit of detection (LOD) determined by the manufacturer] was used for calculating the proportion of positive samples. In addition, the mean, median and range were investigated for each province based on samples with AFM1 concentrations above 0.15 μg/kg.

Data analysis

A logistic regression model was developed to assess the association between the demographic variables (sex and breed) and positive status (≥LOD) while province was included as a random effect in the model.

For the awareness study, demographic information was collected via questionnaires [variables: age group (<20 years, 20–29 years, 30–39 years, 40–49 years, 50–59 years and ≥60 years), gender (male and female), education level (none, primary/secondary school, high school and college/university or more) and occupation (farmers, retailers, feed manufactures and others)]. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to evaluate the association between the demographic variables and awareness of aflatoxins as the dependent variable (question: Have you heard about aflatoxins?). For variable screening, chi-square tests were conducted for each variable, with only significant variables included in the final model. In addition, province was treated as a random effect to account for clustering. The final model fit was assessed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test [36]. Variables with p-values <0.05 were set for statistical significance in the model. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by exponentiation of the coefficients from the regression model. All data were entered into Microsoft Excel 2013 and analyzed using STATA (version 14.0, StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). ArcGIS version 10.3.1 ArcMap (ESRI, Redlands, CA, USA) was used to generate the map.

Results

A total of 1920 urine samples were collected from slaughterhouses located in five provinces (Hanoi: n = 385, Son La: n = 383, Nghe An: n = 375, Dak Lak: n = 384 and An Giang: n = 393). Overall, the positive rate of AFM1 was 53.90% (95% CI 51.64–56.15) using a cut-off of 0.15 μg/kg (range: LOD to 13.66 μg/kg, median: 0.2 μg/kg and mean: 0.63 μg/kg) (Table 2). Son La and Hanoi had significantly higher positive rates, whereas An Giang had a significantly lower positive rate compared to other provinces.
Table 2

Distribution of aflatoxin M1 levels in pigs from five provinces in Vietnam

Province (No.)

Samples above LOD (% with 95% CI)a

Mean (μg/kg)a

Median (μg/kg)a

Range (μg/kg)a

Hanoi (385)

292 (75.84, 95% CI 71.25–80.04)

0.41

0.19

<LOD - 8.05

Son La (383)

316 (82.51, 95% CI 78.32–86.18)

1.23

0.32

<LOD - 7.35

Nghe An (375)

245 (65.33, 95% CI 60.28–70.15)

0.24

0.18

<LOD - 1.42

Dak Lak (384)

167 (43.49, 95% CI 38.47–48.61)

0.50

0.18

<LOD - 13.66

An Giang (393)

15 (3.82, 95% CI 2.15–6.22)

0.19

0.17

<LOD - 0.30

Total (1920)

1035 (53.90, 95% CI 51.64–56.15)

0.63

0.20

<LOD - 13.66

aMean and median were calculated from the samples above limit of detection (LOD ≥ 0.15 μg/kg)

From collected demographic information (breed and sex), we found that female pigs were significantly more likely to have AFM1 (OR: 1.45, 95% CI: 1.08–1.96) in their urine as opposed to male pigs. Also, “indigenous breed” pigs (OR: 12.40, 95% CI: 5.15–29.82) pigs were significantly more likely to have AFM1 in their urine compared to “exotic breed” pigs (Table 3).
Table 3

Logistic regression model of AFM1 (positive was considered if above the limit of detection, ≥ 0.15 μg/kg) for each category of pigs

Variable

Category

Adjusted Odds ratio

95% CI

P-value

Sex

 

Male

Reference

N/A

N/A

 

Female

1.45

1.08–1.96

0.014*

Breed

 

Exotic

Reference

N/A

N/A

 

Indigenous

12.40

5.15–29.82

<0.001*

 

Mixed

1.51

0.36–6.32

0.576

CI confidence interval, NA not applicable as reference group

*= statistically significant at p < 0.05

A total of 252 people were interviewed from five provinces (Hanoi: n = 49, Son La: n = 50, Nghe An: n = 50, Dak Lak: n = 53 and An Giang: n = 50) to assess their awareness of aflatoxins. Overall, we found that 67.86% (95% CI: 61.71–73.58) of people were aware of aflatoxins. In addition, age groups 21–29 and 30–39 had relatively high awareness of aflatoxins whereas those aged under 20 and those between 50 and 59 years of age had the lowest awareness of aflatoxins (Table 4).
Table 4

Demographic characteristics of survey respondents from “Have you heard about aflatoxins?”

Category

Characteristic (n)

Have you heard about aflatoxins?

Age

< 20 (n = 3)

1 (33.33%)

(year)

21–29 (n = 21)

16 (76.19%)

30–39 (n = 65)

46 (70.77%)

40–49 (n = 89)

62 (69.66%)

50–59 (n = 54)

32 (59.26%)

≥ 60 (n = 20)

14 (70.0%)

Gender

Male (n = 154)

114 (74.03%)

Female (n = 98)

57 (58.16%)

Education

None (n = 3)

1 (33.33%)

Primary & Middle school (n = 97)

49 (50.52%)

High school (n = 115)

88 (76.52%)

College/University or more (n = 37)

33 (89.19%)

Occupation

Farmers (n = 141)

90 (63.83%)

Retailers (n = 36)

27 (75.0%)

Feed manufacturers (n = 10)

9 (90.0%)

Others (office workers and businessmen) (n = 65)

45 (69.23%)

Gender and education were significantly associated with awareness in the univariable analysis and were therefore included in the model. Our final model showed that male (OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.15–6.09), “High school” group (OR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.69–6.86) and “College/university or more” group (OR: 10.20, 95% CI: 4.54–22.89) had significantly increased awareness of aflatoxins compared to the reference group (female and primary/secondary school group) (Table 5). The Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test showed that there was no evidence of poor fit (p-value = 0.27).
Table 5

Final multivariable logistic regression model of awareness of aflatoxins in five provinces in Vietnam

Variable

Category

Odds ratio

95% CI

P-value

Gender

 

Female

Reference

N/A

N/A

 

Male

2.64

1.15–6.09

0.022*

Education

 

None

0.34

0.03–3.91

0.389

 

Primary & Secondary school

Reference

N/A

N/A

 

High school

3.40

1.69–6.86

0.001*

 

College/university or more

10.20

4.54–22.89

<0.001*

CI confidence interval, NA not applicable as reference group

*= statistically significant at p < 0.05

Discussion

This was the first national study to systematically evaluate the concentrations of AFM1 in the urine of pigs in Vietnam. We found that samples from Son La had the highest positive rate; this was consistent with previous research on maize samples which found that Son La had a higher proportion of samples with AFB1 above 2 and 5 μg/kg, compared to five other provinces [30]. Son La is one of the most important maize production areas in Vietnam, mainly due to its suitable agro-climatic conditions and high altitude [37]. Maize is an important source of income for ethnic minorities as well as being one of their staple foods. Moreover, it is the main source feed for livestock (such as pigs and cattle) in Vietnam. In humans and animals, aflatoxins in urine have been used as a marker of exposure, and it has been shown that there is a correlation between aflatoxin intake and serum concentrations, as well as serum concentrations and urine AFM1 concentrations [32, 38]. Therefore, a rigorous investigation is necessary to assess the full impact of AFB1 and AFM1 on plant, animal and human health in Son La province.

Overall, significantly higher positive rates in the northern region (Hanoi and Son La) were observed compared to the southern region (Dak Lak and An Giang), which may be attributed to differences in climatic conditions. In Vietnam, the northern and southern regions are classified into subtropical and tropical conditions, respectively. Some studies have suggested that climatic conditions, particularly temperature and humidity, affect Aspergillus growth and aflatoxin production [3942], and it is possible that this also had an influence on the regional differences observed in this study. Processing also affects aflatoxin production, with insect damaged and high moisture corn being major predisposing factors for contamination. Based on our work, livestock in Vietnam are exposed to AFB1, and there is a risk that meat, eggs and dairy products contain AFM1. This is because the feed used in these livestock systems is very similar and contains a large proportion of maize. Although few studies have been conducted on dairy products, one study in Ho Chi Minh City found that 32.6% milk samples contained AFM1 while one of 46 samples exceeded the limit (0.05 μg/L) under Vietnamese regulation [43]. However, there is currently no guidance on AFB1 levels in animal feed under the Vietnamese regulations, while 5 μg/kg is commonly used as the tolerated level for feedstuffs for dairy cattle in European Union countries [44]. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for total aflatoxin levels are between 20 μg/kg and 300 μg/kg, depending on the commodities and intended species [45]. For corn, less than 20 μg/kg is considered safe for use in all animal feed. Exposure to aflatoxins has adverse effects on human and animal health. Therefore, future research is needed to assess the potential adverse effects of AFM1 residues in meat and dairy products in Vietnam as well as to establish regulations for animal feed to reduce the negative health impacts in humans and animals.

The main limitation of this study was that most of our samples were collected during the dry season, yet aflatoxin levels are seasonally heterogeneous. In a study in Sierra Leone, AFM1 levels from urine samples in humans were higher during the rainy season than the dry season [46]. Another potential bias is that clinically healthy pigs are over-represented as they are more likely to be slaughtered. Although neither slaughterhouses nor participants in the survey were selected probabilistically, we did not expect much bias to have been introduced here, and these samples to be representative.

We found that female pigs had significantly higher exposure to AFM1, although fattening pigs may be expected to be fed the same type of feed independent of gender. However, male animals are known to be more susceptible to aflatoxins than females [47, 48] and it is possible that females could have a higher clearance of aflatoxins through urine, and thus be more protected against the harmful effects. Even among the two sows studied by Lüthy et al. [31], there was a difference in the proportion of fed AFB1 that was excreted as AFM1, 9.6% and 15.7% respectively, so difference in excretion among pigs may be possible. If pregnant and suckling sows are exposed to aflatoxins, this could negatively impact productivity as some studies have shown that chronic exposure to aflatoxins led to lower growth rate in piglets [49, 50]. Urine concentrations of AFM1 were higher in indigenous pigs but the reason for this is unclear. Indigenous pigs are more likely to be raised by ethnic minorities who are less educated and thus have low levels of awareness of aflatoxins, increasing the chances of the animals consuming feed with high levels of AFB1. Moreover, susceptibility to aflatoxins varies by breed and this may play a role.

Aflatoxin exposure in pigs has multiple implications. From the food safety point of view, aflatoxins carried over to pork are a food safety hazard. Given that pork accounts for about 70% of livestock production in Vietnam [51], this could be a significant source of human exposure. Pork is of concern as a possible exposure route as it is consumed by more than 95% of the population in Vietnam, with an annual consumption of approximately 24.7 kg per capita [52]. From the farm management point of view, the control of aflatoxin contamination needs to be considered for animal health and economic benefits. In addition further studies are needed to confirm if differences in urine aflatoxin levels are due to differences in exposure or clearance, although human studies have used it as an exposure assessment [38].

Our survey showed that men and more educated groups were more aware of aflatoxins. It is well recognized that Vietnamese women are undervalued and it is not uncommon for women to have limited access to higher education and suffers from lower pay in occupational sectors [53, 54]. The age groups less than 20 and 5–59 showed that awareness of aflatoxins relatively lower while it is worthwhile to conduct further investigation why awareness was low for these groups. It is recommended that women and less well educated groups are targeted for raising the public awareness of aflatoxin risks as well as introduction of control and prevention strategies. The intervention programs may include timing of planting, avoiding drought and rodent/insect control for field management, washing, rapid and proper drying and cleaning for post-harvest [55].

Conclusion

We can conclude that pigs in Vietnam are exposed to aflatoxins to varying degrees, and there may be a risk that pork products could contain AFM1. Further investigation is needed into the possible health impacts as well as to aid in establishing regulations for animal feed to reduce the health impacts in humans and animals.

Abbreviations

AFB1

Aflatoxin B1

AFM1

Aflatoxin M1

CI: 

Confidence interval

ELISA: 

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

FDA: 

Food and Drug Administration

IARC: 

International Agency for Research on Cancer

LOD: 

Limit of detection

NIVR: 

National Institute of Veterinary Research

OD: 

Optical density

OR: 

Odds ratio

Declarations

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the National Institute of Veterinary Research (NIVR) under the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in Vietnam for supporting sample collection and analysis of AFM1. We would also like to thank Tezira for editing.

Funding

We acknowledge the CGIAR Fund Council, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Irish Aid, the European Union, the International Fund for Agricultural Development, the United States Agency for International Development and governments of the Netherlands, New Zealand, Switzerland, Thailand and the United Kingdom for funding to the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security.

Availability of data and materials

All datasets supporting our findings are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Authors’ contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: HSL Performed the experiments: HSL, NVK, HNX and VBN Analyzed the data: HSL, HNX and VBN. Wrote the paper: HSL, JL, HNV and DG. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was approved by the Hanoi Medical University Institutional Review Board (HMU IRB: no. 00003121), Vietnam.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
International Livestock Research Institute, Hanoi, Vietnam
(2)
International Livestock Research Institute, Nairobi, Kenya
(3)
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden
(4)
National Institute of Veterinary Research, Hanoi, Vietnam

References

  1. Gourama H, Bullerman LB. Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus: Aflatoxigenic fungi of concern in foods and feeds: a review. J Food Prot. 1995;58:1395–404.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Richard J, Payne G, Desjardins A, Maragos C, Norred W, Pestka J. Mycotoxins: risks in plant, animal and human systems. CAST Task Force Rep. 2003;139:101–3.Google Scholar
  3. Reddy K, Farhana NI, Salleh B. Occurrence of Aspergillus spp. and aflatoxin B1 in Malaysian foods used for human consumption. J Food Sci. 2011;76:T99–104.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Nguyen MT, Tozlovanu M, Tran TL, Pfohl-Leszkowicz A. Occurrence of aflatoxin B1, citrinin and ochratoxin a in rice in five provinces of the central region of Vietnam. Food Chem. 2007;105:42–7.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Sangare-Tigori B, Moukha S, Kouadio HJ, Betbeder AM, Dano DS, Creppy EE. Co-occurrence of aflatoxin B1, fumonisin B1, ochratoxin a and zearalenone in cereals and peanuts from Côte d’Ivoire. Food Addit Contam. 2006;23:1000–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Sapsford KE, Taitt CR, Fertig S, Moore MH, Lassman ME, Maragos CM, Shriver-Lake LC. Indirect competitive immunoassay for detection of aflatoxin B 1 in corn and nut products using the array biosensor. Biosens Bioelectron. 2006;21:2298–305.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gacem MA, El Hadj-Khelil AO. Toxicology, biosynthesis, bio-control of aflatoxin and new methods of detection. Asian Pac J Trop Biomed. 2016;6:808–4.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Prandini A, Tansini G, Sigolo S, Filippi L, Laporta M, Piva G. On the occurrence of aflatoxin M1 in milk and dairy products. Food Chem Toxicol. 2009;47:984–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Redzwan SM, Rosita J, Sokhini AMM, Aqilah ARN. Association between aflatoxin M1 excreted in human urine samples with the consumption of milk and dairy products. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol. 2012;89:1115–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Sabbioni G, Sepai O. Determination of human exposure to aflatoxins. Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food Safety. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc; 1998. p. 183–226.Google Scholar
  11. IARC, 2002. Summaries & Evaluations AFLATOXINS (Group1) volumes 82. Avilable from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol82/82-04.html
  12. Bennett JW, Klich M. Mycotoxins. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003;16:497–516.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Robens J, Richard J. Aflatoxins in animal and human health. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol. 1992;127:69–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Williams JH, Phillips TD, Jolly PE, Stiles JK, Jolly CM, Aggarwal D. Human aflatoxicosis in developing countries: a review of toxicology, exposure, potential health consequences, and interventions. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;80:1106–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Bintvihok A. Toe liver WLW. Controlling aflatoxin danger to duck and duck meat. Control. 2001;17:1–2.Google Scholar
  16. Chun HS, Kim HJ, Ok HE, Hwang JB, Chung DH. Determination of aflatoxin levels in nuts and their products consumed in South Korea. Food Chem. 2007;102:385–91.Google Scholar
  17. Zaghini A, Martelli G, Roncada P, Simioli M, Rizzi L. Mannanoligosaccharides and aflatoxin B1 in feed for laying hens: effects on egg quality, aflatoxins B1 and M1 residues in eggs, and aflatoxin B1 levels in liver. Poult Sci. 2005;84:825–32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Henry SH, Bosch FX, Troxell TC, Bolger PM. Reducing liver cancer--global control of aflatoxin. Science. 1999;286:2453–4.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Atherstone C, Grace D, Lindahl JF, Kang’ethe EK, Nelson F. Assessing the impact of aflatoxin consumption on animal health and productivity. Afr J Food Agric Nutr Dev. 2016;16:10949–66.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Fink-Grernmels J. Mycotoxins: their implications for human and animal health. Vet Q. 1999;21:115–20.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Cheeke PR. Endogenous toxins and mycotoxins in forage grasses and their effects on livestock. J Anim Sci. 1995;73:909–18.Google Scholar
  22. Cook W, Van Alstine W, Osweiler G. Aflatoxicosis in Iowa swine: eight cases (1983-1985). J Am Vet Med Assoc. 1989;19:554–8.Google Scholar
  23. Miller D, Stuart B, Crowell W. Experimental aflatoxicosis in swine: morphological and clinical pathological results. Can J Comp Med. 1981;45:343–51.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  24. Panangala V, Giambrone J, Diener U, Davis N, Hoerr F, Mitra A, Schultz R, Wilt G. Effects of aflatoxin on the growth performance and immune responses of weanling swine. Am J Vet Res. 1986;47:2062–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Andretta I, Kipper M, Lehnen CR, Hauschild L, Vale MM, Lovatto PA. Meta-analytical study of productive and nutritional interactions of mycotoxins in growing pigs. Animal. 2012;6:1476–82.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Dersjant-Li Y, Verstegen MW, Gerrits WJ. The impact of low concentrations of aflatoxin, deoxynivalenol or fumonisin in diets on growing pigs and poultry. Nutr Res Rev. 2003;16:223–39.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Trung T, Bailly J, Querin A, Le Bars P, Guerre P. Fungal contamination of rice from south Vietnam, mycotoxinogenesis of selected strains and residues in rice. Rev Med Vet. 2001;152:555–60.Google Scholar
  28. Wang DS, Liang YX, Chau NT, Dien LD, Tanaka T, Ueno Y. Natural co-occurrence of Fusarium toxins and aflatoxin B1 in com for feed in North Vietnam. Nat Toxins. 1995;3:445–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Thieu NQ, Ogle B, Pettersson H. Screening of Aflatoxins and Zearalenone in feedstuffs and complete feeds for pigs in southern Vietnam. Trop Anim Health Prod. 2008;40:77–83.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lee HS, Nguyen-Viet H, Lindahl J, Thanh H, Khanh T, Hien L, Grace D. A survey of aflatoxin B1 in maize and awareness of aflatoxins in Vietnam. World Mycotoxin J. in press;2017Google Scholar
  31. Lüthy J, Zweifel U, Schlatter C. Metabolism and tissue distribution of [14 C] aflatoxin B 1 in pigs. Food Cosmet Toxicol. 1980;18:253–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Thieu NQ, Pettersson H. Zearalenone, deoxynivalenol and aflatoxin B1 and their metabolites in pig urine as biomarkers for mycotoxin exposure. Mycotoxin Res. 2009;25:59–66.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Ho C. The metabolites of aflatoxins B1 and G1 in the pig urine. J Chin Soc of Vet Sic. 1987;13:197–201.Google Scholar
  34. Kottek M, Grieser J, Beck C, Rudolf B, Rubel F. World Map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol Z. 2016;15:259–63. doi:10.1127/0941-2948/2006/0130.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Sawada H, Araki M, Chappell NA, LaFrankie JV, Shimizu A. (Eds.). Forest environments in the Mekong River basin. Springer. 2007;169.Google Scholar
  36. Hosmer DW, Hosmer T, Le Cessie S, Lemeshow S. A comparison of goodness-of-fit tests for the logistic regression model. Stat Med. 1997;16:965–80.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Karimov AA, Thinh NT, Cadilhon JJ, Khanh TT, Van Thuy T, Long CTM, Truc DT N. Value chain assessment report for avocado, cattle, pepper and cassava in Dak Lak province of Central Highlands of Vietnam. ILRI (aka ILCA and ILRAD); 2016.Google Scholar
  38. Gan LS, Skipper PL, Peng X, Groopman JD, Chen JS, Wogan GN, Tannenbaum SR. Serum albumin adducts in the molecular epidemiology of aflatoxin carcinogenesis: correlation with aflatoxin B1 intake and urinary excretion of aflatoxin M1. Carcinogenesis. 1988;9:1323–5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Magan N, Aldred D. Post-harvest control strategies: minimizing mycotoxins in the food chain. Int J Food Microbiol. 2007;119:131–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Magan N, Aldred D, Hope R, Mitchell D. Environmental factors and interactions with mycobiota of grain and grapes: effects on growth, deoxynivalenol and ochratoxin production by Fusarium culmorum and Aspergillus carbonarius. Toxins. 2010;2:353–66.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Medina A, Rodríguez A, Sultan Y, Magan N. Climate change factors and Aspergillus flavus: effects on gene expression, growth and aflatoxin production. World Mycotoxin J. 2014;8:171–9.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Wu F, Bhatnagar D, Bui-Klimke T, Carbone I, Hellmich R, Munkvold G, Paul P, Payne G, Takle E. Climate change impacts on mycotoxin risks in US maize. World Mycotoxin J. 2011;4:79–93.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. VTH T. Detection and qualification of aflatoxin in raw materials, cattle feeds and fresh milk. PhD Thesis. Vietnam: International University HCMC; 2014.Google Scholar
  44. FAO. 2013 Worldwide regulations for mycotoxins in food and feed. Available from: http://www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5499e/y5499e00.htm.Google Scholar
  45. FDA, 2016. Action Levels for Aflatoxins in Animal Feeds. Available from http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/ComplianceManuals/CompliancePolicyGuidanceManual/ucm074703.htm.Google Scholar
  46. Jonsyn-Ellis FE. Seasonal variation in exposure frequency and concentration levels of aflatoxins and ochratoxins in urine samples of boys and girls. Mycopathologia. 2001;152:35–40.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Cote LM, Beasley VR, Bratich PM, Swanson SP, Shivaprasad HL, Buck WB. Sex-related reduced weight gains in growing swine fed diets containing deoxynivalenol. J Anim Sci. 1985;61:942–50.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Gurtoo HL, Motycka L. Effect of sex difference on the in vitro and in vivo metabolism of aflatoxin B1 by the rat. Cancer Res. 1976;36:4663–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Dilkin P, Zorzete P, Mallmann C, Gomes J, Utiyama C, Oetting L, Correa B. Toxicological effects of chronic low doses of aflatoxin B 1 and fumonisin B 1-containing Fusarium moniliforme culture material in weaned piglets. Food Chem Toxicol. 2003;41:1345–53.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Marin D, Taranu I, Bunaciu R, Pascale F, Tudor D, Avram N, Sarca M, Cureu I, Criste R, Suta V. Changes in performance, blood parameters, humoral and cellular immune responses in weanling piglets exposed to low doses of aflatoxin. J Anim Sci. 2002;80:1250–7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Lemke U, Mergenthaler M, Roßler R, Huyen L, Herold P, Kaufmann B, Zarate AV. Pig production in Vietnam–a review. CAB Rev: Pers Agri Vet Sci Nutri Nat Res. 2008;23:1–15.Google Scholar
  52. Nga NTD, Lapar L, Unger F, Van Hung P, Ha DN, Huyen NTT, Van Long T, Be D T. Conference on International Research on Food Security. Tropentag, Berlin, Germany September 16-18, 2015.Google Scholar
  53. Schuler SR, Anh HT, Ha VS, Minh TH, Mai BTT, Thien PV. Constructions of gender in Vietnam: in pursuit of the ‘three criteria’. Cult Health Sex. 2006;8:383–94.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. UN, 2016. Cross-cutting Themes: Gender. Available from: http://www.un.org.vn/en/component/content/article.html?Itemid=&id=1081:cross-cutting-themes-gender.Google Scholar
  55. Hell K, Mutegi C, Fandohan P. Aflatoxin control and prevention strategies in maize for sub-Saharan Africa. Julius-Kühn-Archiv. 2010;425:534–41.Google Scholar

Copyright

© The Author(s). 2017

Advertisement