| Literature DB >> 28785910 |
Anitha Seetha1, Wills Munthali1, Harry W Msere1, Elirehema Swai2, Yasinta Muzanila3, Ethel Sichone1, Takuji W Tsusaka1, Abhishek Rathore4, Patrick Okori5.
Abstract
The staple crops, maize, sorghum, bambara nut, groundnut, and sunflower common in semi-arid agro-pastoral farming systems of central Tanzania are prone to aflatoxin contamination. Consumption of such crop produce, contaminated with high levels of aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), affects growth and health. In this paper, aflatoxin contamination in freshly harvested and stored crop produce from central Tanzania was examined, including the efficacy of aflatoxin mitigation technologies on grain/kernal quality. A total of 312 farmers were recruited, trained on aflatoxin mitigation technologies, and allowed to deploy the technologies for 2 years. After 2 years, 188 of the 312 farmers were tracked to determine whether they had adopted and complied with the mitigation practices. Aflatoxigenic Aspergillus flavus and aflatoxin B1 contamination in freshly harvested and stored grains/kernels were assessed. A. flavus frequency and aflatoxin production by fungi were assayed by examining culture characteristics and thin-layer chromatography respectively. AFB1 was assayed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The average aflatoxin contamination in freshly harvested samples was 18.8 μg/kg, which is above the acceptable standard of 10 μg/kg. Contamination increased during storage to an average of 57.2 μg/kg, indicating a high exposure risk. Grains and oilseeds from maize, sorghum, and sunflower produced in aboveground reproductive structures had relatively low aflatoxin contamination compared to those produced in geocarpic structures of groundnut and bambara nut. Farmers who adopted recommended post-harvest management practices had considerably lower aflatoxin contamination in their stored kernels/grains. Furthermore, the effects of these factors were quantified by multivariate statistical analyses. Training and behavioral changes by farmers in their post-harvest practice minimize aflatoxin contamination and improve food safety. Moreover, if non-trained farmers receive mitigation training, aflatoxin concentration is predicted to decrease by 28.9 μg/kg on average.Entities:
Keywords: Aflatoxin contamination; Confounding factor; Crop diversity; Food safety; Post-harvest management; Sub-Saharan Africa; Tanzania
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28785910 PMCID: PMC5644708 DOI: 10.1007/s12550-017-0286-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mycotoxin Res ISSN: 0178-7888 Impact factor: 3.833
Changes in farmer knowledge, attitude, and practice (KAP) awareness on AFB1 and the needed mitigation practice before and after training
| KAP items captured during survey | Before training proportion (%) | After training proportion (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Awareness of AFB1 | 30.0 | 82.0 |
| Farmers who grade the grains before storage | 23.0 | 84.0 |
| Farmers who remove rotten grains before storage | 14.0 | 78.0 |
| Awareness of methods of drying, grading and storage |
| 92.0 |
| Farmers drying grains just because it is traditional practice | 100.0 | 0.0 |
| Farmers who practice proper drying methods | 34.0 | 82.0 |
| Farmers who practice proper storage methods | 36.0 | 82.0 |
| Farmers who throw away the grade out | 15.0 | 35. |
| Farmers who utilize the grade outs in alternate ways | 75. | 42. |
| Farmers who feed the grade outs to livestock | 10. | 23. |
Fig. 1Presence of (a) aflatoxigenic A. flavus showing blue fluorescence surrounding the colonies under UV light and (b) negative control of A. flavus colonies that do not produce fluorescence under UV light
Levels of AFB1 contamination in grain/kernels of selected crops from a semi-arid agroecology of central of Tanzania based on AFB1 levels in fresh sample material and AFB1 levels in stored sample material and frequency of aflatoxigenic A. flavus
| Village | Frequency of aflatoxigenic | Crops | AFB1 in fresh sample | AFB1 in stored sample |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SE | Maximum | Mean ± SE | Maximum |
| |||
| Chitego | 84 (45/53) | Bambara nut | 1.5 ± 0.69 | 10.7 | 38.07 ± 5.94 | 74.8 | 6.11** |
| Groundnut | 12.0 ± 20.7 | 62.0 | 21.9 ± 14.4 | 56.1 | 4.7** | ||
| Maize | na | na | na | na | na | ||
| Sorghum | 7.6 ± 6.4 | 23.4 | 9.1 ± 6.7 | 62.5 | 0.15 ns | ||
| Sunflower | 4.8 ± 1.5 | 43.0 | 19.0 ± 12.2 | 605 | 1.15 ns | ||
| Laikala | 36 (10/28) | Bambara nut | 1.3 ± 0.46 | 13.7 | 3.96 ± 1.0 | 14.3 | 2.72** |
| Groundnut | 32.0 ± 66.4 | 278.0 | 84.9 ± 114.4 | 427.0 | 2.7* | ||
| Maize | 0.09 ± 0.1 | 1.2 | 0.76 ± 0.17 | 2.4 | 3.64** | ||
| Sorghum | 0.35 ± 0.2 | 10.7 | 2.7 ± 1.3 | 29.8 | 1.7 ns | ||
| Sunflower | 1.76 ± 1.7 | 63.0 | 61.1 | 489.3 | 1.5 ns | ||
| Mlali | 50 (22/44) | Bambara nut | 35 ± 114.0 | 411.4 | 207.3 ± 206.0 | 567.8 | 2.28* |
| Groundnut | 21.8 ± 14.1 | 84.8 | 85.4 ± 99.0 | 298.2 | 5.2** | ||
| Maize | 0.03 ± 0.01 | 12.2 | 2.8 ± 1.2 | 21.9 | 2.17* | ||
| Sorghum | 1.00 ± 0.3 | 10.0 | 25.7 ± 17.3 | 70.0 | 1.43* | ||
| Sunflower | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 26.0 | 4.9 ± 1.7 | 43.7 | 1.76* | ||
| Moleti | 50 (10/20) | Bambara nut | 0.7 ± 1.3 | 75.0 | 29.2 ± 24.7 | 105.0 | 6.1** |
| Groundnut | 48.2 ± 41.06 | 868.2 | 377.3 ± 163.7 | 3297.3 | 1.95* | ||
| Maize | 0.9 ± 2.3 | 2.3 | 4.2 ± 9.5 | 43 | 2.76* | ||
| Sorghum | 0.9 ± 0.5 | 2.0 | 9.4 ± 3.5 | 73.9 | 2.3* | ||
| Sunflower | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 2.7 | 99.9 ± 20.6 | 425.4 | 4.8** | ||
| Njoro | 71 (35/49) | Bambara nut | 1.7 ± 1.4 | 4.4 | 41.6 ± 22.6 | 215.5 | 2.4* |
| Groundnut | 15.6 ± 6.3 | 145.4 | 289.7 ± 75.0 | 1178.8 | 3.64** | ||
| Maize | 1.1 ± 0.5 | 23.8 | 2.5 ± 0.5 | 29.2 | 1.71* | ||
| Sorghum | 3.5 ± 0.45 | 10.0 | 93.3 ± 12.3 | 138.7 | 3.7* | ||
| Sunflower | 6.9 ± 5.9 | 294.8 | 82.0 ± 21.3 | 294.8 | 3.95** | ||
AFB1 contamination was estimated using ELISA (Monyo et al. 2012), which has a lower detection limit of 1 μg/kg
*denotes p value < 0.05 and ns denotes p value ≥ 0.05
**denotes p value < 0.01
Fig 2Baseline comparison of AFB1 levels between freshly harvested and stored samples in 2012–2013 in central Tanzania. NB: The p values are for the two-sample t test with unequal variance
Fig. 3Baseline comparison of AFB1 levels between different types of crops produce: kernels/grains produced above ground versus pods produced below ground and oil seed versus starchy crop samples. NB: The p values are for the two-sample t test with unequal variance
AFB1 content in freshly harvested and stored grain samples over two cropping seasons of 2012–2013 and 2013–2014 in central Tanzania
| Year/cropping season | Crop | Frequency of contamination | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Freshly harvested grain/kernels | Stored grain/kernels | ||||
| Number of samples | Samples > 10 (μg/kg) of aflatoxin (%) | Number of samples | Samples > 10 (μg/kg) of aflatoxin (%) | ||
| 2012–2013 | Bambara nut | 78 | 6.4 | 48 | 62.5 |
| Groundnut | 163 | 18.4 | 83 | 81.9 | |
| Sunflower | 138 | 2.1 | 96 | 61.4 | |
| Sorghum | 57 | 0.0 | 40 | 10.0 | |
| Maize | 366 | 1.9 | 96 | 0.0 | |
| 2013–2014 | Bambara nut | 64 | 1.5 | 131 | 1.5 |
| Groundnut | 112 | 5.3 | 137 | 6.5 | |
| Sunflower | 131 | 9.1 | 183 | 3.8 | |
| Sorghum | 35 | 8.5 | 137 | 18.2 | |
| Maize | 166 | 3.6 | 235 | 0.9 | |
Quantification of the effects various factors on AFB1 contamination using ordinary least squares (OLS) multiple regression estimates, 2013–2014
| Dependent variable = AFB1 concentration in crop sample (μg/kg) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Explanatory variable | Coefficients | Standard error |
|
| Groundnut-bambara nut dummy | 38.614 | 12.294 | 0.002 |
| Oilseeds dummy | 0.713 | 11.752 | 0.952 |
| Storage dummy | 40.172 | 9.197 | 0.000 |
| 2014 dummy | −48.809 | 9.581 | 0.000 |
| Intercept | 69.693 | 15.766 | 0.000 |
Number of observations = 2485; R-squared = 0.0231; F-statistic (4. 2480) = 14.67 (p < 0.000)
Fig. 4Comparison of AFB1 levels in fresh and stored grain/kernels samples, central Tanzania. NB: The p values are for the two-sample t test with unequal variance