Search

Monitoring of aflatoxin levels in milk is often complicated in developing countries due to the dominance of informal markets channeling milk in raw form. Farmer's awareness and voluntary participation in aflatoxin mitigation can be critical in such scenarios. Therefore, the present study was conducted to understand the perceptions of dairy farmers about aflatoxins and link it with aflatoxin mitigation programs on milk in Pakistan. Information was collected from 450 peri-urban dairy farmers in seven cities using questionnaires. Majority (77.9%) of the farmers were aware of the negative impact of moldy feed on animal health. However, only 40.6% of the farmers were aware of the transferability of the toxins from moldy feed to milk. The farmers had almost no awareness of aflatoxins as 95% never heard of the term. After receiving an onsite briefing on effects of the toxin on animal and human health, and its transferability to milk, 98.3% farmers showed willingness to buy aflatoxin-safe feedstuffs, while 88.5% showed willingness to control aflatoxin in milk. Around half of the farmers considered aflatoxin control programs as affordable. On average, farmers agreed to pay 10.1% higher price for aflatoxin certified oilseed cakes. Availability of feedstuffs certified of low aflatoxin content was suggested by 22% of the participants as the critical step in reducing aflatoxins in milk. Other important suggestions included; subsidy on quality feeds (18%), raising awareness (18%), and legislation and monitoring (16%). The present results suggest that the current practice of milk monitoring in the country can yield desirable results only if it is coupled with feed certification programs ensuing availability of aflatoxin-safe feeds. Further, awareness can positively impact participation of producers in aflatoxin control programs. In this regard, awareness about effects of aflatoxins on animal health was found to be a more powerful trigger of voluntary control compared with the awareness of the toxin's transferability to milk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: ELISA is a widely used method for aflatoxin M1 (AFM1) quantification in dairy products. This study was conducted to compare ELISA kits from different manufacturers for AFM1 quantification in milk. Methods: High sensitivity ELISA kits (for up to 250 ng AFM1/L), including AgraQuant (Romer Labs), Bioshield M1ES (Prognosis Biotech), Helica 96 (Helica Biosystems), Veratox (Neogen, Inc.), and the medium sensitivity kit Immunolab AM1E01 (Immunolab GmbH; for 10–1000 ng AFM1/L) were tested against a certified reference AFM1 whole milk having 44 ng AFM1/L and its 10-fold dilution, and a 50 ng AFM1/L standard. In another experiment, Prognosis Bioshield M1UF (70–1000 ng AFM1/L), Romer’s AgraquantPlus (10–2000 ng AFM1/L), and Immunulab’s AM1E01 kits were compared to test a 500 ng AFM1/L solution. Results: In both of the experiments, the quantification of the tested AFM1 levels did not differ (P ≥ 0.310) between the kits from various manufacturers. In the case of 4.4 ng AFM1/L, recovery of the toxin was close to the assigned value under the kit by Neogen, Inc. In case the of 44 ng level, better recoveries were seen under the kits by Immunolab and Prognosis Biotech. In both the cases, low relative standard deviation (RSD) values were obtained only for the kit by Prognosis Biotech. In the case of the 50 and 500 ng AFM1/L solutions, the kits by Prognosis Biotech and Romer Labs provided recoveries close to the assigned values as well as low RSD. Conclusions: These data indicate that all the studied ELISA kit brands had comparable efficacy for AFM1 quantification. Recovery of the toxin and RSD may, however, differ between kits from various manufacturers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A longitudinal one-year study was conducted to determine aflatoxin M1 levels in different types of milk marketed in Pakistan. Processed and raw liquid milk from 21 sources, two milk powder and six tea whitener brands were sampled on monthly basis from Islamabad. The aflatoxin M1 levels in liquid milk were lower (p < 0.05) in summer (April to July) compared with the levels in winter (January, November and December). The mean aflatoxin M1 levels were 254.9, 939.5, and 1535.0 ng/L in UHT, pasteurized, and raw milk, respectively (differing at p < 0.001). The mean toxin level in powdered milk after reconstitution was 522.1 ng/L. Overall, 12.9, 41.0, 91.9 and 50.0% of the UHT, pasteurized, raw and powdered milk samples, respectively, exceeded the Codex maximum tolerable limit of 500 ng of aflatoxin M1/L. It was estimated that consumers of raw and processed milk were exposed to 11.9 and 4.5 ng aflatoxin M1, respectively, per kg of body weight daily. The study indicates potential aflatoxin M1 exposure risks for the consumers of raw milk in the country. The levels of the toxin though comparatively lower in milk powder, requires attention as this type of milk is consumed by infants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]