Search

Hog deer (Axis porcinus) are an endangered species in Pakistan, and there is little information about their feed preference in captivity. Seven animals were offered weighed amount of feed in two seasonal binary combinations of fresh fodder and one combination of grains. The fresh seasonal fodder included Oat (Avena sativa), Lucerne (Medicago sativa), Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), and Maize (Zea mays); whereas grains included Wheat (Triticum aestivum) whole-grains and Chickpea (Cicer arietinum) seeds. Thirteen plant samples were collected from the wild habitat of Hog deer in Tunsa Barrage Wildlife Sanctuary. Plant samples from wild and captivity were analysed through proximate analysis for Crude protein, Fiber, Fat and Ash contents. The outcomes concluded that in combination C1, the hog deer preferred Oat over Lucerne (p < 0.05) with a mean percentage±standard error (Mean±SE) of 90.757±0.401 percent for Oat and 9.243±0.401 percent for Lucerne. The animals preferred Maize (p < 0.05) in combination C2 with mean percentage and standard error of 91.657±0.368 percent compared to Sorghum with mean percentage and standard error of 8.343±3.083 percent. Chickpea was the preferred feed item (p < 0.05) against Wheat from the C3 combination with mean percentages and standard error of 92.2±0.453 percent and 7.800±0.453 percent respectively. The results of the proximate analysis revealed that the percentage of Crude Protein was 15.69±4.8 percent and 12.63±1.4 percent for plants in Captivity and plants in the wild respectively. The percentages of Fat content in plants in captivity and the wild were 3.34±0.86 and 3.37±0.41 respectively. The results showed percentages of Ash content in plants both in captive and wild,10.9±5.9 and 32.83±0.98 respectively; whereas, the percentages of fibre contents in the plants in captivity and wild habitats were 21.00±3.9 and 27.01±2.6 respectively. [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]

Background: ELISA is a widely used method for aflatoxin M 1 (AFM 1 ) quantification in dairy products. This study was conducted to compare ELISA kits from different manufacturers for AFM 1 quantification in milk. Methods: High sensitivity ELISA kits (for up to 250 ng AFM 1 /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 AFM 1 /L) were tested against a certified reference AFM 1 whole milk having 44 ng AFM 1 /L and its 10-fold dilution, and a 50 ng AFM 1 /L standard. In another experiment, Prognosis Bioshield M1UF (70-1000 ng AFM 1 /L), Romer's AgraquantPlus (10-2000 ng AFM 1 /L), and Immunulab's AM1E01 kits were compared to test a 500 ng AFM 1 /L solution. Results: In both of the experiments, the quantification of the tested AFM 1 levels did not differ ( P ≥ 0.310) between the kits from various manufacturers. In the case of 4.4 ng AFM 1 /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 AFM 1 /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 AFM 1 quantification. Recovery of the toxin and RSD may, however, differ between kits from various manufacturers.