Hubbry Logo
MycotoxinMycotoxinMain
Open search
Mycotoxin
Community hub
Mycotoxin
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Mycotoxin
Mycotoxin
Mycotoxin
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A mycotoxin (from the Greek μύκης mykes, "fungus" and τοξικός toxikos, "poisonous")[1][2] is a toxic secondary metabolite produced by fungi[3][4] and is capable of causing disease and death in both humans and other animals.[5][6] The term 'mycotoxin' is usually reserved for the toxic chemical products produced by fungi that readily colonize crops.[7]

Examples of mycotoxins causing human and animal illness include aflatoxin, citrinin, fumonisins, ochratoxin A, patulin, trichothecenes, zearalenone, and ergot alkaloids such as ergotamine.[5]

One mold species may produce many different mycotoxins, and several species may produce the same mycotoxin.[8]

Production

[edit]

Most fungi are aerobic (use oxygen) and are found almost everywhere in extremely small quantities due to the diminutive size of their spores. They consume organic matter wherever humidity and temperature are sufficient. Where conditions are right, fungi proliferate into colonies and mycotoxin levels become high. The reason for the production of mycotoxins is not yet known; they are not necessary for the growth or the development of the fungi.[9] Because mycotoxins weaken the receiving host, they may improve the environment for further fungal proliferation. The production of toxins depends on the surrounding intrinsic and extrinsic environments and these substances vary greatly in their toxicity, depending on the organism infected and its susceptibility, metabolism, and defense mechanisms.[10]

Major groups

[edit]

Aflatoxins are a type of mycotoxin produced by Aspergillus species of fungi, such as A. flavus and A. parasiticus.[11][12][13][14][15] The umbrella term aflatoxin refers to four different types of mycotoxins produced, which are B1, B2, G1, and G2.[16] Aflatoxin B1, the most toxic, is a potent carcinogen and has been directly correlated to adverse health effects, such as liver cancer, in many animal species.[11] Aflatoxins are largely associated with commodities produced in the tropics and subtropics, such as cotton, peanuts, spices, pistachios, and maize.[11][16] According to the USDA, "They are probably the best known and most intensively researched mycotoxins in the world."[17]

Ochratoxin is a mycotoxin that comes in three secondary metabolite forms, A, B, and C. All are produced by Penicillium and Aspergillus species. The three forms differ in that Ochratoxin B (OTB) is a nonchlorinated form of Ochratoxin A (OTA) and that Ochratoxin C (OTC) is an ethyl ester form Ochratoxin A.[18] Aspergillus ochraceus is found as a contaminant of a wide range of commodities including beverages such as beer and wine. Aspergillus carbonarius is the main species found on vine fruit, which releases its toxin during the juice making process.[19] OTA has been labeled as a carcinogen and a nephrotoxin, and has been linked to tumors in the human urinary tract, although research in humans is limited by confounding factors.[18][19]

Citrinin is a toxin that was first isolated from Penicillium citrinum, but has been identified in over a dozen species of Penicillium and several species of Aspergillus. Some of these species are used to produce human foodstuffs such as cheese (Penicillium camemberti), sake, miso, and soy sauce (Aspergillus oryzae). Citrinin is associated with yellowed rice disease in Japan and acts as a nephrotoxin in all animal species tested.[20] Although it is associated with many human foods (wheat, rice, corn, barley, oats, rye, and food colored with Monascus pigment) its full significance for human health is unknown. Citrinin can also act synergistically with Ochratoxin A to depress RNA synthesis in murine kidneys.[21]

Ergot alkaloids are compounds produced as a toxic mixture of alkaloids in the sclerotia of species of Claviceps, which are common pathogens of various grass species. The ingestion of ergot sclerotia from infected cereals, commonly in the form of bread produced from contaminated flour, causes ergotism, the human disease historically known as St. Anthony's Fire. There are two forms of ergotism: gangrenous, affecting blood supply to extremities, and convulsive, affecting the central nervous system. Modern methods of grain cleaning have significantly reduced ergotism as a human disease; however, it is still an important veterinary problem. Ergot alkaloids have been used pharmaceutically.[21]

Patulin is a toxin produced by the P. expansum, Aspergillus, Penicillium, and Paecilomyces fungal species. P. expansum is especially associated with a range of moldy fruits and vegetables, in particular rotting apples and figs.[22][23] It is destroyed by the fermentation process and so is not found in apple beverages, such as cider. Although patulin has not been shown to be carcinogenic, it has been reported to damage the immune system in animals.[22] In 2004, the European Community set limits to the concentrations of patulin in food products. They currently stand at 50 μg/kg in all fruit juice concentrations, at 25 μg/kg in solid apple products used for direct consumption, and at 10 μg/kg for children's apple products, including apple juice.[22][23]

Fusarium toxins are produced by over 50 species of Fusarium and have a history of infecting the grain of developing cereals such as wheat and maize.[24][25] They include a range of mycotoxins, such as: the fumonisins, which affect the nervous systems of horses and may cause cancer in rodents; the trichothecenes, which are most strongly associated with chronic and fatal toxic effects in animals and humans; and zearalenone, which is not correlated to any fatal toxic effects in animals or humans. Some of the other major types of Fusarium toxins include: enniatins such as beauvericin), butenolide, equisetin, and fusarins.[26]

Occurrence

[edit]

Although various wild mushrooms contain an assortment of poisons that are definitely fungal metabolites causing noteworthy health problems for humans, they are rather arbitrarily excluded from discussions of mycotoxicology. In such cases the distinction is based on the size of the producing fungus and human intention.[21] Mycotoxin exposure is almost always accidental whereas with mushrooms improper identification and ingestion causing mushroom poisoning is commonly the case. Ingestion of misidentified mushrooms containing mycotoxins may result in hallucinations. The cyclopeptide-producing Amanita phalloides is well known for its toxic potential and is responsible for approximately 90% of all mushroom fatalities.[27] The other primary mycotoxin groups found in mushrooms include: orellanine, monomethylhydrazine, disulfiram-like, hallucinogenic indoles, muscarinic, isoxazole, and gastrointestinal (GI)-specific irritants.[28] The bulk of this article is about mycotoxins that are found in microfungi other than poisons from mushrooms or macroscopic fungi.[21]

In indoor environments

[edit]

Buildings are another source of mycotoxins and people living or working in areas with mold increase their chances of adverse health effects. Molds growing in buildings can be divided into three groups – primary, secondary, and tertiary colonizers. Each group is categorized by the ability to grow at a certain water activity requirement. It has become difficult to identify mycotoxin production by indoor molds for many variables, such as (i) they may be masked as derivatives, (ii) they are poorly documented, and (iii) the fact that they are likely to produce different metabolites on building materials. Some of the mycotoxins in the indoor environment are produced by Alternaria, Aspergillus (multiple forms), Penicillium, and Stachybotrys.[29] Stachybotrys chartarum contains a higher number of mycotoxins than other molds grown in the indoor environment and has been associated with allergies and respiratory inflammation.[30] The infestation of S. chartarum in buildings containing gypsum board, as well as on ceiling tiles, is very common and has recently become a more recognized problem. When gypsum board has been repeatedly introduced to moisture, S. chartarum grows readily on its cellulose face.[31] This stresses the importance of moisture controls and ventilation within residential homes and other buildings. The negative health effects of mycotoxins are a function of the concentration, the duration of exposure, and the subject's sensitivities. The concentrations experienced in a normal home, office, or school are often too low to trigger a health response in occupants.

In the 1990s, public concern over mycotoxins increased following multimillion-dollar toxic mold settlements. The lawsuits took place after a study by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Cleveland, Ohio, reported an association between mycotoxins from Stachybotrys spores and pulmonary hemorrhage in infants. However, in 2000, based on internal and external reviews of their data, the CDC concluded that because of flaws in their methods, the association was not proven. Stachybotrys spores in animal studies have been shown to cause lung hemorrhaging, but only at very high concentrations.[32]

One study by the Center of Integrative Toxicology at Michigan State University investigated the causes of Damp Building Related Illness (DBRI). They found that Stachybotrys is possibly an important contributing factor to DBRI. So far animal models indicate that airway exposure to S. chartarum can evoke allergic sensitization, inflammation, and cytotoxicity in the upper and lower respiratory tracts. Trichothecene toxicity appears to be an underlying cause of many of these adverse effects. Recent findings indicate that lower doses (studies usually involve high doses) can cause these symptoms.[30]

Some toxicologists have used the Concentration of No Toxicological Concern (CoNTC) measure to represent the airborne concentration of mycotoxins that are expected to cause no hazard to humans (exposed continuously throughout a 70–yr lifetime). The resulting data of several studies have thus far demonstrated that common exposures to airborne mycotoxins in the built indoor environment are below the CoNTC, however agricultural environments have potential to produce levels greater than the CoNTC.[33]

In food

[edit]

Mycotoxins can appear in the food chain as a result of fungal infection of crops, either by being eaten directly by humans or by being used as livestock feed.

In 2004 in Kenya, 125 people died and nearly 200 others required medical treatment after eating aflatoxin-contaminated maize.[34] The deaths were mainly associated with homegrown maize that had not been treated with fungicides or properly dried before storage. Due to food shortages at the time, farmers may have been harvesting maize earlier than normal to prevent thefts from their fields, so that the grain had not fully matured and was more susceptible to infection.

Spices are susceptible substrate for growth of mycotoxigenic fungi and mycotoxin production.[35] Red chilli, black pepper, and dry ginger were found to be the most contaminated spices.[35]

Physical methods to prevent growth of mycotoxin‐producing fungi or remove toxins from contaminated food include temperature and humidity control, irradiation and photodynamic treatment.[36] Mycotoxins can also be removed chemically and biologically using antifungal/anti‐mycotoxins agents and antifungal plant metabolites.[36]

In animal food

[edit]
Main article: Mycotoxins in animal feed

Dimorphic fungi, which include Blastomyces dermatitidis and Paracoccidioides brasiliensis, are known causative agents of endemic systemic mycoses.[37]

There were outbreaks of dog food containing aflatoxin in North America in late 2005 and early 2006,[38] and again in late 2011.[39]

Mycotoxins in animal fodder, particularly silage, can decrease the performance of farm animals and potentially kill them.[40][4] Several mycotoxins reduce milk yield when ingested by dairy cattle.[40]

In dietary supplements

[edit]

Contamination of medicinal plants with mycotoxins can contribute to adverse human health problems and therefore represents a special hazard.[41][42] Numerous natural occurrences of mycotoxins in medicinal plants and herbal medicines have been reported[43][44] from various countries including Spain, China, Germany, India, Turkey and from the Middle East.[41] In a 2015 analysis of plant-based dietary supplements, the highest mycotoxin concentrations were found in milk thistle-based supplements, at up to 37 mg/kg.[45]

Health effects

[edit]

Some of the health effects found in animals and humans include death, identifiable diseases or health problems, weakened immune systems without specificity to a toxin, and as allergens or irritants. Some mycotoxins are harmful to other micro-organisms such as other fungi or even bacteria; penicillin is one example.[46] It has been suggested that mycotoxins in stored animal feed are the cause of rare phenotypical sex changes in hens that causes them to look and act male.[47][48] Mycotoxins impact on health may be "very hard" and can be categorized in three forms "as mutagenic, carcinogenic, and genotoxic."[49]

In humans

[edit]

Mycotoxicosis is the term used for poisoning associated with exposures to mycotoxins. Mycotoxins have the potential for both acute and chronic health effects via ingestion, skin contact,[50] inhalation, and entering the blood stream and lymphatic system. They inhibit protein synthesis, damage macrophage systems, inhibit particle clearance of the lung, and increase sensitivity to bacterial endotoxin.[31] Testing for mycotoxicosis can be conducted using immunoaffinity columns.[51]

The symptoms of mycotoxicosis depend on the type of mycotoxin; the concentration and length of exposure; as well as age, health, and sex of the exposed individual.[21] The synergistic effects associated with several other factors such as genetics, diet, and interactions with other toxins have been poorly studied. Therefore, it is possible that vitamin deficiency, caloric deprivation, excessive alcohol use, and infectious disease status can all have compounded effects with mycotoxins.[21]

Mitigation

[edit]

Mycotoxins greatly resist decomposition or being broken down in digestion, so they remain in the food chain in meat and dairy products. Even temperature treatments, such as cooking and freezing, do not destroy some mycotoxins.[52]

Removal

[edit]

In the feed and food industry, it has become common practice to add mycotoxin binding agents such as montmorillonite or bentonite clay in order to effectively adsorb the mycotoxins.[53] To reverse the adverse effects of mycotoxins, the following criteria are used to evaluate the functionality of any binding additive:

  • Efficacy of active component verified by scientific data
  • A low effective inclusion rate
  • Stability over a wide pH range
  • High capacity to absorb high concentrations of mycotoxins
  • High affinity to absorb low concentrations of mycotoxins
  • Affirmation of chemical interaction between mycotoxin and adsorbent
  • Proven in vivo data with all major mycotoxins
  • Non-toxic, environmentally friendly component

Since not all mycotoxins can be bound to such agents, the latest approach to mycotoxin control is mycotoxin deactivation. By means of enzymes (esterase, de-epoxidase), yeast (Trichosporon mycotoxinvorans), or bacterial strains (Eubacterium BBSH 797 developed by Biomin), mycotoxins can be reduced during pre-harvesting contamination. Other removal methods include physical separation, washing, milling, nixtamalization, heat-treatment, radiation, extraction with solvents, and the use of chemical or biological agents. Irradiation methods have proven to be effective treatment against mold growth and toxin production.[53]

Regulations

[edit]

Many international agencies are trying to achieve universal standardization of regulatory limits for mycotoxins. Currently, over 100 countries have regulations regarding mycotoxins in the feed industry, in which 13 mycotoxins or groups of mycotoxins are of concern.[54] The process of assessing a regulated mycotoxin involves a wide array of in-laboratory testing that includes extracting, clean-up columns,[55] and separation techniques.[56] Most official regulations and control methods are based on high-performance liquid techniques (e.g., HPLC) through international bodies.[56] It is implied that any regulations regarding these toxins will be in co-ordinance with any other countries with which a trade agreement exists. Many of the standards for the method performance analysis for mycotoxins is set by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN).[56] However, one must take note that scientific risk assessment is commonly influenced by culture and politics, which, in turn, will affect trade regulations of mycotoxins.[57]

Food-based mycotoxins were studied extensively worldwide throughout the 20th century. In Europe, statutory levels of a range of mycotoxins permitted in food and animal feed are set by a range of European directives and EC regulations. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulated and enforced limits on concentrations of mycotoxins in foods and feed industries since 1985. It is through various compliance programs that the FDA monitors these industries to guarantee that mycotoxins are kept at a practical level. These compliance programs sample food products including peanuts and peanut products, tree nuts, corn and corn products, cottonseed, and milk. There is still a lack of sufficient surveillance data on some mycotoxins that occur in the U.S.[58]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Mycotoxin

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Mycotoxins are naturally occurring toxic secondary metabolites produced by certain species of filamentous fungi, such as , , and , which contaminate a wide range of agricultural commodities including cereals, nuts, dried fruits, and spices under favorable environmental conditions like high humidity and temperature. These compounds are not essential for fungal growth but serve ecological roles, such as defense against competitors, and persist through and storage, leading to unavoidable exposure risks in global food chains. The most prevalent mycotoxins include aflatoxins (produced mainly by Aspergillus flavus), ochratoxin A, fumonisins, trichothecenes (e.g., deoxynivalenol), and zearalenone, each exhibiting distinct mechanisms of toxicity that disrupt cellular processes like DNA synthesis, protein production, and oxidative balance. Health effects in humans and animals range from acute symptoms—such as vomiting, diarrhea, and hemorrhage—to chronic outcomes including hepatotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, immunosuppression, reproductive disorders, and carcinogenicity, with aflatoxin B1 classified as a potent liver carcinogen linked to hepatocellular carcinoma in epidemiological studies. Co-exposure to multiple mycotoxins, common in staple foods of developing regions, may exacerbate these effects through synergistic interactions, though data on combined toxicities remain limited by methodological challenges in exposure assessment. Mycotoxins impose substantial economic burdens through direct losses, downgraded feed quality, veterinary treatment costs, and rejections, with annual global impacts estimated in the billions of dollars, particularly affecting , , , and tree nuts in temperate and tropical climates. Prevention relies on integrated approaches, including resistant varieties, timely harvesting to minimize fungal , adequate and storage to control moisture below critical thresholds (typically under 14%), and post-harvest interventions like sorting, biological detoxification, and adherence to regulatory limits set by bodies such as the . Despite advances, challenges persist in monitoring low-level chronic exposures and developing cost-effective controls for smallholder farmers in high-risk areas.

History

Discovery and Early Incidents

Ergotism outbreaks in medieval provided early of fungal toxins in , with frequent epidemics attributed to consumption of contaminated by , a fungus producing ergot alkaloids. Known as Saint Anthony's Fire, these events caused symptoms including convulsions, hallucinations, , and death, occurring commonly between 500 and 1500 AD across regions like , where estimates indicate 20,000 to 50,000 fatalities between 900 and 1300 AD. Such incidents linked moldy grains to but were not systematically tied to specific metabolites until centuries later. The pivotal modern identification of mycotoxins stemmed from the 1960 Turkey "X" disease outbreak in , where over 100,000 turkey poults died from and hemorrhaging after ingesting imported meal. The contaminated meal, sourced from and harboring , prompted veterinary investigations that isolated s—blue-fluorescent hepatotoxins—as the causal agents by late 1960. Similar fatalities occurred in ducklings and pheasants fed the same feed, confirming the toxins' potency in young and initiating targeted fungal research. Parallel early observations in highlighted rice contamination risks, with studies from 1891 demonstrating that moldy, unpolished caused fatal liver damage in experimental animals. Epidemics of yellow rice toxicoses, linked to molds like Penicillium islandicum producing luteoskyrin and related compounds, affected humans and in years including 1890, 1901, 1914, 1932, and 1946, underscoring fungal metabolites' role in hemorrhagic and hepatic syndromes prior to aflatoxin recognition. These incidents collectively spurred the 1962 coining of "mycotoxin" to denote fungal-derived poisons in feeds and foods.

Scientific Recognition and Research Milestones

In the 1960s, following the identification of aflatoxins as the cause of turkey "X" disease in 1960, animal bioassays demonstrated their hepatocarcinogenic potential, with studies in 1967 confirming as one of the most potent liver carcinogens known at the time. By the early 1970s, the (WHO) and (FAO) recognized aflatoxins as a significant global threat, leading to the establishment of provisional tolerable weekly intakes and guidelines for monitoring in commodities like and . These milestones shifted focus from to chronic risks, prompting international surveillance programs. The 1980s and 1990s saw expanded recognition of other mycotoxins, with identified in 1965 but linked to porcine nephropathy and human through epidemiological and experimental studies by the mid-1980s. Fumonisins were isolated in 1988 from verticillioides cultures associated with equine leukoencephalomalacia outbreaks, establishing their role in neural toxicity via disruption in animal models. This period also featured the development of standards, including maximum residue limits for aflatoxins in 1995 and fumonisins by 2001, reflecting harmonized risk assessments by WHO/FAO joint expert committees based on dose-response data from and primate studies. From the 2000s onward, genomic approaches elucidated mycotoxin biosynthesis pathways, with the complete in sequenced by 2005, enabling targeted gene disruption studies that confirmed regulatory mechanisms like aflR transcription factors. Similar advances mapped FUM s in by the late 2000s, facilitating breeding of resistant crops. Recent research from 2023–2025 has highlighted climate-driven increases in mycotoxin prevalence, with analyses showing warmer, wetter conditions expanding and ranges, potentially elevating and deoxynivalenol levels in cereals by 20–50% in vulnerable regions. These findings, derived from field surveys and predictive modeling, underscore needs amid shifting environmental pressures.

Definition and Biosynthesis

Chemical Properties

Mycotoxins constitute a diverse class of low-molecular-weight organic compounds, typically ranging from 200 to 700 Da, classified as secondary metabolites produced by filamentous fungi. These molecules are generally non-volatile and exhibit chemical heterogeneity, encompassing structures derived from , , and pathways. Their polarity varies significantly, influencing solubility profiles: lipophilic mycotoxins such as aflatoxins (e.g., , molecular weight 312.3 Da) show poor water solubility (10–20 μg/mL) but dissolve readily in , , and , whereas hydrophilic ones like fumonisins (e.g., fumonisin B1, 721 Da) exhibit high aqueous solubility (≥20 g/L) alongside compatibility with -water mixtures. Ochratoxins, hybrid polyketide-nonribosomal peptide derivatives (e.g., , 403.8 Da), demonstrate moderate solubility in polar organic solvents like and at neutral or acidic . Structural diversity is evident in motifs such as the difuran-coupled ring in polyketide-derived aflatoxins, the and hydroxyl groups in sesquiterpenoid trichothecenes (e.g., deoxynivalenol, 296.3 Da), and the macrocyclic in resorcylic acid lactones like (318.4 Da). Many mycotoxins display stability, resisting degradation during ; for instance, deoxynivalenol remains intact up to 170°C, and shows minimal loss (<5%) at 100–120°C for short durations, though higher temperatures (e.g., 200°C) induce partial . This resilience, coupled with tolerance to moderate ranges (e.g., trichothecenes stable across 1–10), contributes to their persistence in stored commodities and processed products. However, susceptibilities exist, such as UV lability in aflatoxins or pH-dependent ring opening in lactone-containing structures.

Fungal Producers and Production Conditions

Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by certain filamentous fungi, primarily species within the genera , , and , which colonize organic substrates under conducive physiological and environmental conditions. These fungi exhibit opportunistic behavior, preferentially infecting plant tissues weakened by abiotic stresses such as or biotic factors like damage, which compromise physical barriers and create entry points for germination and hyphal growth. Favorable production conditions include relative humidity exceeding 70%, levels above 0.85, and temperatures in the range of 20–30°C, which support fungal sporulation, mycelial expansion, and metabolic activation of biosynthetic pathways. availability on carbohydrate-rich substrates further drives , as carbon sources directly influence activity in these pathways. Stress-induced physiological shifts in host , such as altered water relations from , elevate fungal and yields by signaling adaptive responses in the . Not all isolates within toxigenic species produce mycotoxins, as production depends on the presence and of specific genetic clusters encoding enzymes like synthases, synthetases, and regulatory transcription factors. These clusters are hierarchically regulated by global and pathway-specific factors responsive to environmental cues, such as nutrient scarcity or , ensuring toxin synthesis occurs only under conditions conferring ecological advantages like deterrence of competitors or herbivores. Intra-species variability arises from mutations or epigenetic silencing, rendering many strains non-toxigenic despite shared phylogenetic ancestry.

Classification

Major Chemical Groups

Mycotoxins are classified into major chemical groups primarily based on their structural characteristics, such as core skeletons and functional groups, alongside the fungal genera responsible for their production. This aids in understanding biosynthetic pathways and contamination patterns, with over 300 identified mycotoxins dominated by a few prevalent families produced by , , and species. The following table summarizes key groups, their chemical classes, and primary producers:
GroupChemical ClassPrincipal Producers
AflatoxinsDifurocoumarin derivatives with a bifuran moiety fused to a coumarin nucleus and lactone ringAspergillus flavus, A. parasiticus
OchratoxinsIsocoumarin derivatives linked to amino acids, featuring a chlorinated isocoumarin coreAspergillus spp. (e.g., A. ochraceus), Penicillium spp. (e.g., P. verrucosum)
FumonisinsDiesters of tricarballylic acid with a long-chain polyhydroxyalkylamine backboneFusarium verticillioides, F. proliferatum
TrichothecenesSesquiterpenoids with a 12,13-epoxytrichothec-9-ene core, subdivided into types A–D based on substitutionsFusarium spp. (e.g., F. graminearum), Myrothecium, Trichoderma
ZearalenonesResorcyclic acid lactones with a macrocyclic ring fused to a phenolic moietyFusarium spp. (e.g., F. graminearum, F. culmorum)
Patulinγ-Lactone with an α,β-unsaturated system and hemiacetal functionalityPenicillium expansum, Aspergillus spp.
Emerging groups, such as alternaria toxins (e.g., alternariol, a dibenzopyrone derivative produced by spp.), are gaining attention due to their detection in diverse commodities, though they remain less regulated than the above.

Key Examples and Structures

Aflatoxin B1, the most toxic , consists of a moiety fused with a bisfuran ring system, enabling its metabolic activation to a highly reactive exo-8,9-epoxide intermediate that alkylates DNA residues, driving hepatocarcinogenicity and . Oral LD50 values for range from 0.3 to 17.9 mg/kg body weight across species, with ducks and young rats showing heightened sensitivity around 0.3–1 mg/kg. Deoxynivalenol, a type B mycotoxin also termed , features a sesquiterpenoid structure with a 12,13-epoxy ring, 3-hydroxyl, and 8-keto groups, which facilitate protein synthesis inhibition via ribosomal binding and trigger emesis through activation of the in the . In , emesis occurs at oral doses from 0.02 to 0.2 mg/kg body weight, establishing a benchmark of effect (BMDL10) for acute exposure at 0.21 mg/kg body weight per day. Its acute oral LD50 exceeds 50 mg/kg body weight in and pigs. Ergot alkaloids, exemplified by ergotamine, possess a tetracyclic skeleton derived from with peptide substitutions, exerting vasoconstrictive effects via partial agonism at serotonin 5-HT1B/1D receptors, which contracts vascular . This pharmacological action underpins semi-synthetic derivatives like ergotamine tartrate, used therapeutically for acute relief at doses of 1–2 mg orally, though excessive exposure risks and ischemia. Historical outbreaks involved similar alkaloids from , causing gangrenous through sustained vasoconstriction.

Occurrence and Sources

In Agricultural Commodities and Food

Mycotoxins frequently contaminate staple crops such as and , with s posing significant risks in regions of and where these foods form dietary mainstays. Surveys indicate that aflatoxin levels in can exceed regulatory limits in up to 50% of samples from , driven by species thriving in warm, humid pre-harvest conditions. In , groundnut contamination rates reach 20-30% above safe thresholds, contributing to estimated global economic losses of 3-4% in yields and higher in due to rejection in trade. Fumonisins, produced primarily by species, contaminate corn at incidences approaching 100% in humid temperate regions, with concentrations often surpassing 1-20 mg/kg in affected kernels under prolonged wet weather. These levels amplify post-harvest if drying is delayed or incomplete, as above 14% enables fungal proliferation and accumulation during storage, potentially increasing concentrations by orders of magnitude within weeks. Improper storage practices, such as inadequate ventilation or pest ingress, further exacerbate risks by fostering co-colonization by multiple fungi. Recent data from 2023-2025 reveal climate-driven elevations in mycotoxin prevalence, with experiencing expanded fungal ranges due to warmer temperatures and erratic rainfall, leading to higher deoxynivalenol and detections in grains. In the , 2024 harvest analyses showed average mycotoxins per corn sample rising to 8.3 from 5.3 in 2023, linked to prolonged and drought-stress cycles favoring toxin producers. These shifts underscore causal links between altered patterns and heightened vulnerability in temperate zones previously less affected. Human dietary exposure occurs predominantly through contaminated grains, spices, and fermented products like , where or adjunct carry over toxins during processing. Co-occurrence of multiple mycotoxins—such as aflatoxins with fumonisins in or ochratoxins in spices—affects up to 60-80% of global samples, complicating as synergistic effects may amplify toxicity beyond individual thresholds. Global monitoring emphasizes staples in developing regions, where chronic low-level intake via undiversified diets heightens cumulative exposure.

In Animal Feed

Mycotoxins commonly contaminate and hay, serving as primary exposure routes for , with species producing toxins like and deoxynivalenol (DON) at high incidences under moist storage conditions. mimics , inducing , , mammary enlargement, and reduced fertility in , while DON exacerbates reproductive failures by impairing ovarian function and embryo viability. These effects manifest in porcine herds consuming contaminated forages, distinct from acute poisoning, through chronic low-level intake. Aflatoxins from species in concentrate feeds bioaccumulate via carryover in , where 1–2% of ingested metabolizes to M1 in , reaching up to 6% in high-yielding cows and amplifying veterinary monitoring needs. This transfer occurs rapidly post-ingestion, with residues detectable within hours, underscoring feed as a vector for subclinical herd impacts. Subclinical mycotoxin exposure drives economic losses by impairing feed efficiency and growth; in , DON-contaminated feed reduces intake by 18% and by 21%, while multi-toxin mixtures across elevate production costs through diminished utilization. A documented outbreak in 2005–2006 involved levels of 35–191 ppb in recalled , causing at least 28 canine deaths and illustrating acute feed-related mortality risks beyond . Species-specific sensitivities vary markedly: , particularly and turkeys, show heightened vulnerability to aflatoxins due to inefficient hepatic , leading to liver damage and at doses as low as 50 ppb. Ruminants, conversely, exhibit greater resilience via rumen microbial , degrading up to 90% of certain mycotoxins like aflatoxins before absorption, though forages still pose chronic threats to non-ruminant segments.

In Indoor and Built Environments

Mycotoxins have been detected in water-damaged indoor environments, primarily associated with fungal growth on building materials such as , insulation, and wood. , often referred to as black mold, thrives on cellulose-rich substrates in conditions of prolonged moisture, producing macrocyclic trichothecene mycotoxins like satratoxins and roridins. species, including A. versicolor and A. fumigatus, are also common in damp structures and can generate sterigmatocystin and gliotoxin, respectively, as identified in analyses of crude building materials from flooded or leaky buildings. Detection of these mycotoxins occurs predominantly in settled dust, surface swabs, and bulk samples rather than routinely in breathable air, according to environmental sampling guidelines from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Airborne mycotoxin levels linked to conidia or fragments have been measured, but concentrations remain low in typical indoor air sampling, with risks of significant exposure requiring extraordinarily high spore counts exceeding 10^5-10^6 per cubic meter. Aspergillus-derived mycotoxins similarly show limited in undisturbed settings, influenced by factors like poor ventilation, high relative above 60%, and inadequate drying after intrusion. Building materials' composition affects colonization; porous, organic substrates promote growth, while ventilation systems can disperse fragments if not maintained. A 2025 study of Finnish buildings revealed hidden growth with airborne toxin loads around 4 μg per conidial particle, yet emphasized that high indoor concentrations are rare without ongoing leaks or flooding. Urban climate trends, including rising humidity from 2024 data, may elevate mold risks in poorly insulated structures, but verifiable high mycotoxin levels necessitate specific events rather than ambient conditions.

Factors Influencing Prevalence

significantly influence mycotoxin prevalence by altering fungal growth conditions and host plant susceptibility. Warmer temperatures and altered precipitation patterns are projected to expand the range of species, producers of trichothecenes like deoxynivalenol (DON), into higher latitudes, with models indicating increased contamination risks in European cereals under scenarios of +2°C warming. Conversely, stress during critical growth stages, such as silking in , heightens vulnerability to invasion, elevating levels; field studies in the southeastern U.S. link preharvest to aflatoxin concentrations exceeding 20 ppb in susceptible hybrids. compounded by further amplify this by impairing plant defense mechanisms, allowing fungal proliferation under water-limited conditions. Agronomic practices shape mycotoxin incidence through their effects on management and soil-fungus interactions. systems correlate with higher occurrence in , as continuous host availability fosters buildup of toxigenic fungal populations in soil; surveys in report odds ratios up to 2.5 for in monocropped versus diversified fields. , including no-till, preserves surface residues that serve as overwintering sites for , increasing DON carryover to subsequent crops by 30-50% in temperate regions compared to conventional . Excessive fertilization can exacerbate by promoting lush vegetative growth that delays maturity, extending exposure windows to humid conditions favorable for mycotoxinogenesis. Global trade facilitates the dissemination of mycotoxin-contaminated commodities, bypassing localized production controls. Shipments from endemic regions, where up to 80% of may exceed safe thresholds, enter international markets, with a single contaminated lot potentially affecting millions of tons; for instance, 2023-2024 trade data highlight aflatoxin alerts in exported nuts and grains from to . Inadequate pre-export screening in developing producers amplifies this risk, as economic pressures prioritize volume over quality assurance. Emerging cultivation of alternative crops like exhibits elevated mycotoxin risks due to specialized growing environments and variable oversight. Inflorescences often harbor and , yielding aflatoxins and ochratoxins at levels up to 100 μg/kg in unregulated samples, stemming from high-density indoor humidity and organic substrates that retain moisture. Analysis of seized U.S. products in 2024 revealed fusarenon-X concentrations prompting health concerns, linked to incomplete fungal control in nascent industries lacking standardized agronomic protocols.

Health Effects

Effects in Animals

Acute exposure to aflatoxins, particularly aflatoxin B1, induces severe hepatotoxicity in various livestock species, often culminating in liver failure and death. In poultry, the median lethal dose (LD50) ranges from 0.24–0.36 mg/kg body weight in ducklings, 0.5–1.0 mg/kg in turkeys, and 3–10 mg/kg in chicks, with pathological changes including hemorrhagic liver necrosis and elevated liver enzymes. Pigs and dogs exhibit heightened susceptibility to aflatoxins, displaying acute signs such as jaundice, coagulopathy, and rapid mortality at doses exceeding 0.5 mg/kg. Dogs are also particularly susceptible to tremorgenic mycotoxins produced by Penicillium species, such as penitrem A, which cause neurological symptoms including vomiting, tremors, ataxia, and seizures. Additionally, mycotoxins from Stachybotrys chartarum (black mold) can lead to respiratory distress and systemic toxicity, including potential neurological effects, in dogs. Similarly, fumonisins, especially fumonisin B1, cause equine leukoencephalomalacia (ELEM) in horses, characterized by liquefactive necrosis of cerebral white matter leading to ataxia, head pressing, and fatal neurological collapse following consumption of contaminated corn-based feeds at levels above 8–10 ppm. Chronic low-level exposure to mycotoxins elicits across multiple species, impairing immune cell function and diminishing vaccine efficacy. In and , aflatoxins and trichothecenes reduce production and T-cell proliferation, resulting in poorer responses to vaccines against Newcastle disease or infectious bronchitis, with studies showing up to 50% lower protection rates in contaminated flocks. exerts pronounced in , mimicking to induce ; doses of 1–10 mg/kg body weight orally cause vulvovaginitis, prolonged estrus, and reduced , with sows exhibiting enlarged uteri and decreased litter sizes after 5–10 ppm in feed over estrous cycles. Species-specific vulnerabilities highlight differential susceptibility, with aquaculture species like and proving particularly sensitive due to reliance on plant-based feeds prone to mycotoxin . exposed to at 0.5–2 ppm display stunted growth, hepatic steatosis, , and heightened disease susceptibility, often with feed conversion ratios increasing by 20–30%. Mycotoxin residues can transfer from contaminated feeds to animal products, including , liver, and eggs; aflatoxins metabolize to AFM1 in eggs at carry-over rates of 0.1–1%, while Fusarium toxins like deoxynivalenol appear in muscle at low ppm levels, posing potential risks.

Effects in Humans

Acute mycotoxicosis in humans is rare and typically results from high-level dietary exposure to contaminated food, manifesting as severe hepatic and gastrointestinal symptoms that can lead to death. A notable example occurred in in 2004, where consumption of aflatoxin-contaminated caused an outbreak with 317 reported cases and 125 fatalities, primarily due to and . Symptoms in such cases include , , , and rapid progression to , with case fatality rates exceeding 30% in affected cohorts. Chronic exposure to specific mycotoxins, particularly from species, has been causally linked to through epidemiological studies in high-exposure regions like and . The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies as a carcinogen, with cohort data showing elevated relative risks of in populations with detectable urinary biomarkers, often synergizing with infection. exposure has been associated with nephrotoxicity, including tubulointerstitial damage observed in , where higher serum levels correlate with disease prevalence in endemic areas of , , and the former . Subclinical effects include impaired growth in children from repeated low-to-moderate dietary exposure, as evidenced by longitudinal studies in linking aflatoxin biomarkers to stunting and reduced height-for-age z-scores independent of other nutritional factors. Infants represent a vulnerable due to lactational transfer of mycotoxins like M1 from maternal , potentially exacerbating early-life growth deficits, though direct causal impacts require further biomarker-confirmed evidence. Widespread low-dose effects remain unverified without reliable exposure metrics, as subclinical immune modulation or lacks consistent human cohort support beyond high-burden settings.

Toxicological Mechanisms

Mycotoxins induce toxicity primarily through interference with fundamental cellular processes, such as DNA integrity, protein synthesis, and redox homeostasis. Aflatoxins, produced by Aspergillus species, exemplify genotoxic mechanisms; aflatoxin B1 undergoes bioactivation via cytochrome P450 enzymes (notably CYP1A2 and CYP3A4) to form the reactive exo-8,9-epoxide metabolite, which covalently binds to the N7 position of guanine in DNA, forming stable adducts that distort the helix and impede replication and transcription. This adduction can lead to G-to-T transversions, as observed in p53 hotspot mutations in hepatocellular carcinoma models. Trichothecenes, including deoxynivalenol and T-2 toxin from species, target eukaryotic ribosomes by binding to the peptidyl transferase center on the 60S subunit, thereby inhibiting the elongation step of protein synthesis and causing ribotoxic stress. This binding disrupts formation without cleaving rRNA, leading to stabilization and accumulation of unfinished polypeptides, as demonstrated in cell-free translation assays. Complementary pathways involve , where multiple mycotoxins (e.g., and fumonisins) generate (ROS), depleting antioxidants like and triggering mitochondrial dysfunction, caspase activation, and in hepatocytes and enterocytes. Bioactivation exhibits species-specific variations due to differential CYP450 expression and capacity; for instance, rodents efficiently conjugate aflatoxin epoxide via S-transferase (GST), mitigating formation, whereas primates and humans show lower GST activity toward this metabolite, heightening susceptibility. In mixtures, mycotoxins often display additive or synergistic , as evidenced by toxicokinetic models integrating absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion () data, where co-exposure amplifies bioactivation or overwhelms pathways beyond single-compound predictions. These interactions underscore the need for mixture-specific risk assessments, particularly in chronic low-dose scenarios prevalent in contaminated feeds.

Detection and Quantification

Traditional Analytical Methods

Traditional analytical methods for mycotoxin detection rely on chromatographic techniques, with (TLC) employed for qualitative screening and (GC) or (HPLC) used for quantitative determination. These approaches emphasize laboratory precision and validation, often aligning with standards from organizations like for analyzing grains and feeds. TLC facilitates rapid, cost-effective screening of mycotoxins such as aflatoxins, trichothecenes, fumonisins, and in cereals, corn, and foodstuffs, utilizing UV or visualization on plates. While suitable for crude extracts due to its simplicity and availability of stationary phases, TLC demands thorough sample cleanup to mitigate interferences and yields semi-quantitative results unless coupled with , limiting its sensitivity compared to instrumental methods. For quantification, HPLC with fluorescence or UV detection predominates, separating and measuring aflatoxins, , fumonisins, and in complex matrices like , wine, and at trace levels. Derivatization may be required for non-fluorescent analytes, and the method's high resolution and specificity support , with limits of detection typically ranging from 0.1 to 10 ng/g (1–10 ppb). GC, often with or detection, targets volatile or derivatizable toxins like trichothecenes after trimethylsilylation, providing ng/g sensitivity but restricting application to thermally stable compounds. Sample preparation is integral, involving initial solvent extraction (e.g., acetonitrile-water mixtures) to liberate mycotoxins from the matrix, followed by cleanup via or immunoaffinity columns for selective retention and removal of co-extractants. Immunoaffinity columns, leveraging specificity, enhance purity for subsequent , enabling detection below 1 µg/kg in many cases and reducing false positives in high-matrix samples like feeds. These protocols, established as pre-2000s benchmarks, ensure accuracy for official testing despite their labor-intensive nature.

Advanced and Rapid Detection Techniques

Liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has emerged as a cornerstone for multi-mycotoxin profiling, enabling simultaneous quantification of over 100 toxins in complex matrices with . Recent validations, such as a 2025 method for 110 mycotoxins and plant toxins, demonstrate limits of detection below regulatory thresholds (e.g., 0.1-5 μg/kg for aflatoxins), addressing the need for comprehensive screening in grains and feeds. These advancements incorporate to minimize quantification errors, outperforming single-toxin assays in throughput. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays () and lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA) facilitate rapid on-site detection, with LFIA strips providing results in 5-15 minutes without specialized equipment. Developments from 2015-2024 have enhanced nanoparticle integration in LFIA for detection limits as low as 0.1 ng/mL, suitable for field use in cereals. Multiplex LFIA formats, validated in 2024 for aflatoxins and in , achieve simultaneous analysis with visual or reader-based quantification, though cross-reactivity requires toxin-specific antibodies. Aptamer-based biosensors and platforms offer portable alternatives, leveraging high-affinity ligands for selective binding. A 2024 review highlights electrochemical aptasensors detecting at 0.01 ng/mL via gold nanoparticle amplification, enabling real-time monitoring in beverages. These systems reduce assay times to under 30 minutes, with nanomaterial enhancements improving over antibody-based methods. AI-enhanced vibrational enables non-destructive crop scanning, integrating hyperspectral or mid-infrared data with for predictive modeling. A 2025 portable mid-infrared approach detects aflatoxins in infected within 1 minute, achieving 95% accuracy via chemometric algorithms that extract spectral features amid matrix noise. Trials in cereals demonstrate convolutional neural networks classifying mycotoxin levels non-invasively, supporting pre-harvest decisions. Persistent challenges include matrix effects, where co-extractives suppress ionization in LC-MS/MS, necessitating internal standards for compensation. Validation against gold standards like is essential, as emerging biosensors often lack standardized protocols, risking over- or underestimation in fatty or protein-rich foods. Ongoing refinements focus on robust to ensure reliability across diverse commodities.

Mitigation and Control

Prevention in Agriculture

Crop management practices form the foundation of mycotoxin prevention by addressing fungal proliferation during growth. Selecting resistant crop varieties, such as Fusarium-resistant hybrids, reduces susceptibility to toxins like fumonisins and deoxynivalenol. Timely planting and harvesting minimize exposure to conducive weather, with studies showing that delayed harvest in can increase aflatoxin levels by up to 10-fold due to prolonged field stress. and further disrupt fungal cycles, lowering toxigenic populations in soil. Biocontrol using atoxigenic strains of competitively excludes toxigenic counterparts, reducing contamination in crops like and by 70-90% in field applications. These strains, applied as soil inoculants before flowering, have demonstrated efficacy in diverse regions, including and , without introducing new risks when selected from native populations. Post-harvest storage interventions target and environmental controls to inhibit fungal growth. Rapid of grains to below 14% content prevents mycotoxin formation, as levels above this threshold enable Aspergillus and Fusarium proliferation. and cooling to under 15°C maintain low , with chemical preservatives like propionates used judiciously to avoid residues, as their efficacy diminishes over time and regulatory scrutiny increases. Integration of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) systems identifies vulnerabilities from field to storage, enabling proactive monitoring of critical factors like and . Recent evaluations of transgenic varieties engineered for enhanced resistance show over 50% reduction in and accumulation under field conditions.

Decontamination and Removal

Physical methods for mycotoxin decontamination primarily target surface contaminants through mechanical separation and processing. Sorting, including manual and automated techniques, can reduce levels by up to 80%, deoxynivalenol by 83.6%, and fumonisins by 84% by discarding visibly moldy or damaged grains. Milling and cleaning further remove outer layers where mycotoxins often concentrate, achieving 50-80% reduction in surface-bound toxins like those on kernels, though efficacy depends on contamination depth. using gamma rays or electron beams degrades certain mycotoxins, such as and , by 60-90% at doses of 10-20 kGy, while preserving in grains. Ozonation, a gaseous treatment, oxidizes mycotoxins like and fumonisins in aqueous or grain matrices, with reductions up to 95% for at concentrations of 10-50 ppm ozone for 30-60 minutes, though it may alter feed . Chemical treatments alter mycotoxin structure to reduce . Ammoniation involves exposing contaminated feed, such as corn, to gas under (e.g., 100-200 psi at 80-100°C for 30-60 minutes), converting aflatoxins into less toxic compounds and achieving 70-90% reduction while improving protein content. Adsorbents like clays bind polar mycotoxins such as aflatoxins in , sequestering up to 90% through and surface adsorption, thereby preventing gastrointestinal absorption in . Modified bentonites enhance binding capacity via increased , sorbing at rates exceeding 95% in simulated conditions. Other effective adsorbents include aluminosilicates (such as hydrated sodium calcium aluminosilicate) and yeast cell wall products (containing β-glucans and mannan-oligosaccharides), which bind a range of mycotoxins and are commonly incorporated into poultry feed to reduce toxin absorption and alleviate clinical signs of mycotoxicosis. In poultry, where mycotoxicoses are common due to high susceptibility, treatment focuses on supportive care as no specific antidote exists. Initial management involves immediate removal of contaminated feed to stop further exposure and replacement with clean feed supplemented with mycotoxin binders to limit additional absorption. Supportive therapy includes antioxidants and vitamin supplements to mitigate oxidative stress, support liver and immune function, and aid recovery. Vitamin E is particularly valuable for its antioxidant effects against mycotoxin-induced lipid peroxidation. Combinations of vitamins A, D3, and E (AD3E), such as the commercial supplement Dufaprovit AD3E, are widely used in poultry to enhance immunity and reduce oxidative damage during recovery from mycotoxicoses. Biological approaches, particularly enzymatic degradation, show promise for targeted breakdown. Recent 2025 research highlights enzymes like laccases and peroxidases from fungi or that cleave mycotoxin rings, degrading aflatoxins by 80-100% under mild conditions ( 5-7, 30-50°C), with genetically engineered variants improving specificity and stability for industrial use. These methods avoid harmful byproducts, unlike some chemical processes. Despite efficacy, faces limitations, especially for intracellular mycotoxins embedded within matrices, where physical sorting and surface treatments fail to access 20-50% of total . Enzymatic and adsorbent methods may not fully mineralize toxins, risking incomplete or residue formation. In developing regions, high costs—e.g., facilities exceeding $1 million initial investment—and energy demands render advanced techniques impractical, exacerbating economic losses estimated at tens of billions annually from untreated . Cost-benefit analyses favor simple adsorbents for feed but underscore scalability challenges in resource-limited settings.

Regulatory Frameworks

The Commission, under the FAO and WHO, establishes international maximum levels for mycotoxins in and feed to facilitate trade and protect , including a limit of 0.05 μg/kg for M1 in . These standards serve as benchmarks but are not legally binding, allowing national variations that can lead to enforcement inconsistencies. For instance, while sets guidance for deoxynivalenol (DON) at 2 mg/kg in raw cereal grains, implementation differs, with some regions adopting lower thresholds based on risk assessments. The enforces stricter limits than the on certain mycotoxins, reflecting precautionary approaches to chronic exposure risks. EU regulations cap DON at 1.75 mg/kg for unprocessed cereals intended for direct human consumption as of July 2024, down from prior levels to align with updated EFSA tolerable daily intakes of 1 μg/kg body weight. In contrast, the US FDA applies advisory levels for DON, such as 5 mg/kg in finished products, without mandatory maximums for all commodities, prioritizing post-market over preemptive caps. These divergences contribute to trade frictions, with EU rejections of US corn shipments exceeding mycotoxin thresholds costing exporters millions annually in diverted or discarded volumes. Global harmonization efforts face persistent challenges, including disparate analytical capabilities and economic priorities that hinder uniform enforcement. Developing markets often lack resources for routine testing, resulting in under-detection in informal sectors where up to 60-80% of samples may exceed limits without repercussions. Overly stringent regulations in high-income regions risk unnecessary barriers, while lax oversight elsewhere amplifies vulnerabilities, particularly as shifts expand mycotoxin prevalence in new crops and areas. Emerging standards are adapting to these dynamics, with bodies like the EEA highlighting needs for revised thresholds on climate-sensitive toxins like fumonisins in northern latitudes. Compliance gaps underscore the tension between protective intent and practical feasibility, with data indicating that inconsistent application reduces overall efficacy in mitigating exposure.

Economic and Societal Impacts

Agricultural and Trade Losses

No recent official global economic estimate for mycotoxins is provided by FAO or WHO in their primary publications or fact sheets, which focus primarily on health risks, occurrence, and control measures rather than monetary losses. Recent studies and reviews indicate the economic impact is substantial, with global losses from crop rejection, reduced yields, animal productivity losses, and trade barriers estimated in the billions of dollars annually, though precise figures vary by mycotoxin type, region, and study methodology. For example, aflatoxins alone have been estimated to cause hundreds of millions to billions in losses in developing countries through trade and health costs. Mycotoxin in crops results in direct economic losses primarily through the rejection and disposal of contaminated , with global estimates indicating that approximately 25% of major food crops such as cereals, nuts, and pulses are affected annually. , contamination in corn leads to annual losses ranging from $52.1 million to $1.68 billion, encompassing downgraded grain values, export restrictions, and disposal costs. These figures exclude broader mycotoxin impacts on other crops like and , which contribute an additional estimated $932 million in crop losses nationwide. International trade barriers amplify these agricultural hits, as stringent regulatory limits in importing regions trigger frequent rejections. , via its Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF), rejected numerous groundnut shipments from African exporters in 2022 due to aflatoxin levels exceeding permissible thresholds, with mycotoxins accounting for the primary cause of such border refusals for nuts. Over 23% of EU food import rejections involve mycotoxins, particularly in nut products from developing regions, disrupting supply chains and forcing exporters to seek alternative markets or incur testing and compliance expenses that elevate global commodity prices. Indirect losses stem from subclinical mycotoxin exposure in feed, which impairs animal without overt . In the , these effects— including reduced feed intake, growth rates, and reproductive efficiency—generate an additional $466 million annually in sector costs beyond crop discards. Such subclinical impacts lower overall yields by decreasing utilization and increasing susceptibility to secondary infections, compounding economic strain across integrated agricultural systems.

Public Health Burden

Mycotoxins, particularly aflatoxins produced by species, contribute to (HCC) through genotoxic mechanisms involving formation and mutations, with an estimated 25,200 to 155,000 annual cases attributable globally, representing 5-28% of the roughly 550,000-600,000 new HCC incidences. This burden is concentrated in high-exposure regions like and , where chronic dietary intake from contaminated staples such as and groundnuts exceeds safe thresholds, synergizing with prevalence to amplify risk. Empirical cohort studies link urinary aflatoxin biomarkers to elevated HCC odds ratios, confirming causality in endemic areas via prospective designs. In developing regions, mycotoxin exposure correlates with child growth impairment, including stunting, based on cohort analyses showing 23-69% co-occurrence of high levels and linear growth deficits in sub-Saharan populations reliant on maize-based diets. Such associations persist after adjusting for confounders like , though prospective intervention trials are needed to establish dose-response causality beyond observational data. Immunosuppressive effects, potentially exacerbating infectious disease susceptibility, remain hypothesized rather than empirically quantified at population scale, with limited human studies failing to demonstrate broad from verified exposures. In developed nations with stringent regulatory limits (e.g., caps at 4 μg/kg for aflatoxins in foodstuffs), population-level exposure is minimal, rendering acute or chronic health burdens negligible per surveys and low HCC attribution rates outside contexts. Verified metrics prioritize overt toxicities in unregulated supply chains of low- and middle-income countries, where post-harvest storage failures drive contamination, over speculative risks in controlled environments.

Controversies and Scientific Debates

Claims of Chronic Indoor Mold Toxicity

Proponents of the biotoxin theory posit that chronic low-level inhalation of mycotoxins from indoor molds in water-damaged buildings triggers a persistent inflammatory response in genetically susceptible individuals, manifesting as multisystem symptoms including chronic fatigue, cognitive impairment ("brain fog"), joint pain, and respiratory issues. This framework, advanced by physician Ritchie Shoemaker since the late 1990s following observations of mycotoxin-related cases, describes Chronic Inflammatory Response Syndrome (CIRS) as an acquired condition driven by failure of innate immune clearance of biotoxins, leading to cytokine-mediated inflammation, hormonal dysregulation, and potential autoimmunity. Shoemaker's model emphasizes that approximately 25% of the population lacks the HLA-DR gene variants necessary for effective biotoxin elimination, resulting in amplified effects from even trace exposures. Claims highlight mycotoxins such as satratoxins and trichothecenes produced by —a cellulose-degrading mold thriving in chronically damp indoor environments—as key culprits, with media reports from the early 2000s amplifying associations between "black mold" growth in flooded homes and outbreaks of unexplained illnesses. Advocates argue that these non-volatile toxins aerosolize via mold fragments or spores, bypassing typical detoxification pathways and evading standard IgE-mediated allergic responses, thus causing subtler, chronic effects like and endothelial disruption rather than acute . Limited supporting evidence includes animal inhalation studies where low-dose mycotoxin exposure, such as to or derivatives, induced pulmonary , Th2-skewed immune responses, and exacerbated airway remodeling in rodent models of allergic disease. Proponents cite case series involving over 1,800 patients where symptom clusters aligned with mold exposure histories, with reported improvements in visual contrast sensitivity and fatigue scores following and biotoxin binders like cholestyramine. Anecdotal accounts from clinical protocols describe resolution of markers and cognitive deficits post-removal from contaminated spaces, though these lack randomized controls.

Skepticism and Empirical Evidence Gaps

Scientific consensus highlights significant gaps in supporting claims of chronic systemic from airborne mycotoxins in indoor environments, with authoritative bodies emphasizing that such effects lack causal substantiation. The American College of Medical Toxicology (ACMT) stated in its August 2025 that there is no documented linking exposure to fungi or mycotoxins indoors to a chronic toxic , attributing reported symptoms more plausibly to allergic responses, irritants, or volatile organic compounds rather than absorbed mycotoxins. Similarly, the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI) position from 2006, reaffirmed in subsequent reviews, identifies mold-related health effects as arising primarily from immunoglobulin E-mediated allergies, , or irritancy, without endorsement of mycotoxin as a mechanism for widespread systemic illness.02591-1/fulltext) Efforts to identify biomarkers for airborne mycotoxin absorption leading to systemic disease have yielded inconsistent results, undermining claims of "toxic mold syndrome." Peer-reviewed analyses, such as a 2019 review in the Journal of Medical Toxicology, describe the syndrome as a myth unsupported by reproducible biomarkers or dose-response data in typical residential exposures, where mycotoxin concentrations fall far below levels associated with toxicity in animal models. Human biomonitoring studies for mycotoxins focus predominantly on urinary or serum markers from dietary ingestion, with inhalation routes showing negligible absorption and no validated indicators of chronic end-organ damage from indoor air. Epidemiological investigations have failed to establish causal links between indoor mold exposure and non-respiratory chronic conditions like cognitive impairment or autoimmunity, often confounded by co-exposures to allergens or poor building conditions.02591-1/fulltext) Mycotoxin toxicity is inherently dose-dependent and route-specific, with required for significant systemic effects observed in agricultural or contamination contexts, whereas indoor doses remain orders of magnitude too low to induce harm. Toxicological assessments indicate that achieving a toxic threshold via airborne particles would necessitate unrealistically high concentrations, unfeasible in non-industrial settings without visible fungal overgrowth. This contrasts with alarmist narratives amplified in litigation and remediation industries, which prioritize unverified mycotoxin testing over evidence-based control; critiques from experts urge discernment, noting that while acute high-exposure cases (e.g., occupational) warrant caution, pervasive claims of insidious indoor lack rigorous validation and may divert from addressing verifiable risks like exacerbation.

References

  1. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mycotoxins
  2. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1371/54d79952d0c3eb75401dd44e7e689571b84c5469.pdf
  3. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1370/dc8dee47d7103ec656f7656e60494eb8906a1d2d.pdf
  4. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772566922000155
  5. https://www.fda.gov/food/natural-toxins-food/mycotoxins
  6. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1376/cbd1bbd5beca0e8453759290072217258a92aa95.pdf
  7. https://www.apsnet.org/edcenter/sites/Mycotoxins/Pages/EconomicImpact.aspx
  8. https://enveurope.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s12302-025-01166-x
  9. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1379/ac1882efaa995e9235b429cacf1d8232b0f4171d.pdf
  10. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1378/cf18c35802429a1f50a2d434340e848cb6d26f28.pdf
  11. https://cropwatch.unl.edu/2017/has-ergot-altered-events-world-history/
  12. https://www.fs.usda.gov/wildflowers/ethnobotany/Mind_and_Spirit/ergot.shtml
  13. https://asm.org/articles/2018/november/from-poisoning-to-pharmacy-a-tale-of-two-ergots
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC164220/
  15. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15569540802462040
  16. https://poisonousplants.ansci.cornell.edu/toxicagents/aflatoxin/aflatoxin.html
  17. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16025655/
  18. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02652030701744520
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8227755/
  20. https://www.fao.org/4/AM811E/AM811E.pdf
  21. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3153212/
  22. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1240671/
  23. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-50986-5
  24. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9861139/
  25. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/mycotoxin-exposure-in-a-changing-european-climate
  26. https://www.intertek.com/blog/2025/03-14-mycotoxins-food-security-in-a-changing-climate/
  27. https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/cmr.16.3.497-516.2003
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7662353/
  29. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/1372/292f829f75e2d9bd641611e2768b3db005839ad2.pdf
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0168160598001123
  31. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/5/3/492
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8228748/
  33. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/78611
  34. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0362028X23042436
  35. https://www.dsm-firmenich.com/anh/en_NA/news/articles/how-can-agronomic-practices-influence-mycotoxin-contamination-in-feeds.html
  36. https://www.mdpi.com/2309-608X/9/1/21
  37. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366533587_Genetic_Regulation_of_Mycotoxin_Biosynthesis
  38. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-23802-8
  39. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2019.02266/full
  40. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9147583/
  41. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/ochratoxin
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10534725/
  43. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Fumonisin-B1
  44. https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/26/1/184
  45. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3202860/
  46. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/toxicology/mycotoxicoses/trichothecene-toxicosis-in-animals
  47. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Zearalenone
  48. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7825134/
  49. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Patulin
  50. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12249242/
  51. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/6/632
  52. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9027791/
  53. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7013914/
  54. https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/40024
  55. https://apps.who.int/food-additives-contaminants-jecfa-database/Home/Chemical/2947
  56. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6940999/
  57. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK555953/
  58. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK548405/
  59. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7298049/
  60. https://www.fao.org/4/AM810E/AM810E.pdf
  61. https://ift.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1541-4337.12731
  62. https://ker.com/equinews/avoid-risks-fumonisin-corn/
  63. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0956713517301329
  64. https://www.fao.org/4/x5065e/x5065E0c.htm
  65. https://randoxfood.com/mycotoxin-risks-set-to-increase-in-usa-2024-harvest/
  66. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4848621/
  67. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10408398.2019.1658570
  68. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7913644/
  69. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022030218303254
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7913079/
  71. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12066055/
  72. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255691531_Fusarium_mycotoxins_Effects_on_reproductive_function_in_domestic_animals-A_review
  73. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10053009/
  74. https://www.thecattlesite.com/articles/4294/aflatoxins-in-milk-do-not-underestimate-an-unavoidable-problem
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8740645/
  76. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10054064/
  77. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925525001866
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3614097/
  79. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4988553/
  80. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/17/1/30
  81. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4549740/
  82. https://om.ciheam.org/om/pdf/a85/00801009.pdf
  83. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC101430/
  84. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC126391/
  85. https://www.epa.gov/mold/mold-course-chapter-1
  86. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1080/10915810490265423
  87. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC544211/
  88. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969725000427
  89. https://www.epa.gov/mold/brief-guide-mold-moisture-and-your-home
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3509714/
  91. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378429013003705
  92. https://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/pdf/10.1094/PHYTO-01-14-0006-R
  93. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-024-00293-8
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9505770/
  95. https://www.world-grain.com/articles/21645-mycotoxins-a-global-food-safety-threat
  96. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10620813/
  97. https://news.asu.edu/20250320-health-and-medicine-new-study-reveals-high-levels-toxins-seized-cannabis-arizona-and
  98. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0041010123002489
  99. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/toxicology/mycotoxicoses/aflatoxicosis-in-animals
  100. https://todaysveterinarypractice.com/toxicology/practical-toxicologytremorgenic-mycotoxin-intoxication-dogs/
  101. https://www.petmd.com/dog/slideshows/mold-poisoning-pets-causes-symptoms-and-treatment
  102. https://www.merckvetmanual.com/toxicology/mycotoxicoses/fumonisin-toxicosis-in-animals
  103. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02652030500058320
  104. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/genetics/articles/10.3389/fgene.2018.00667/full
  105. https://www.dsm-firmenich.com/anh/news/feed-talks/articles/how-zearalenone-impacts-reproductive-performance-in-pigs.html
  106. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/12/3/160
  107. https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/biological-chemical-and-physical-contaminants-animal-food/chemical-contaminants
  108. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0278691520306050
  109. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5334a4.htm
  110. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1855601/
  111. https://www.inchem.org/documents/iarc/vol82/82-04.html
  112. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16715544/
  113. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4657594/
  114. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7988843/
  115. https://bmcpediatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12887-023-04275-9
  116. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC21012/
  117. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ja960525k
  118. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.102167699
  119. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7914836/
  120. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/4521056/
  121. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8949390/
  122. https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/21/21/8187
  123. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7601793/
  124. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/supporting/pub/en-1757
  125. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338794928_Mycotoxin_mixtures_in_food_and_feed_holistic_innovative_flexible_risk_assessment_modelling_approach_MYCHIF
  126. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2662450/
  127. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00216-025-06024-6
  128. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/fungal-biology/articles/10.3389/ffunb.2023.1141427/full
  129. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40711159/
  130. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-024-00342-2
  131. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11356850/
  132. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/chemistry/articles/10.3389/fchem.2020.00195/full
  133. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12475862/
  134. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0023643824014695
  135. https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6651/17/5/219
  136. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691525001541
  137. https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/1225113
  138. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.1c01451
  139. https://www.heraldopenaccess.us/openaccess/agronomic-prevention-of-pre-harvest-mycotoxin-contamination-in-foods-a-review
  140. https://www.alltech.com/blog/7-tips-managing-field-mycotoxins
  141. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9196723/
  142. https://academic.oup.com/lambio/article/78/6/ovaf072/8132917
  143. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5793117/
  144. https://www.agrimprove.com/are-you-storing-mycotoxins-storage-tips-to-prevent-mycotoxins-in-grains/
  145. https://www.neogen.com/en/usac/neocenter/blog/best-practices-to-prevent-mycotoxin-outbreaks/
  146. https://www.fao.org/4/y1390e/y1390e00.htm
  147. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11359299/
  148. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6891401/
  149. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022474X24002431
  150. https://jasbsci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40104-021-00661-4
  151. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7472270/
  152. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7999035/
  153. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/4899256
  154. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-13249-z
  155. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7830723/
  156. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730882/
  157. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/395807686_Enzymatic_detoxification_of_major_mycotoxins_current_status_challenges_and_future_prospective
  158. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/microbiology/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1434987/full
  159. https://www.aimspress.com/article/doi/10.3934/agrfood.2021025?viewType=HTML
  160. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11954124/
  161. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5090115/
  162. https://www.food-safety.com/articles/9382-eu-sets-new-limits-for-mycotoxin-deoxynivalenol-in-unprocessed-grains-among-other-foods
  163. https://food.r-biopharm.com/news/updated-eu-and-us-legislative-limits-for-fusarium-mycotoxins-what-you-need-to-know/
  164. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4815912/
  165. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1382668924001297
  166. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10467123/
  167. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12403-022-00499-9
  168. https://pureadmin.qub.ac.uk/ws/files/185127566/Worldwide_contamination_of_food_crops_with_mycotoxins_Validity_of_the_widely_cited_FAO_estimate_of_25.pdf
  169. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26807606/
  170. https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/processed-fruit-vegetables-edible-nuts/groundnuts/market-entry
  171. https://www.lctech.de/en/blog/myco-rejections-eu
  172. https://www.poultryworld.net/health-nutrition/the-economic-impact-of-mycotoxins/
  173. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/0901388
  174. https://publications.iarc.who.int/_publications/media/download/3626/310e95631e64fc3b546a612e4da60a10b5322ff9.pdf
  175. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-80356-4
  176. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8619365/
  177. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18286404/
  178. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6354945/
  179. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11623837/
  180. https://www.survivingmold.com/docs/UNDERSTANDING_CIRS_EDITV2A.PDF
  181. https://sanjosefuncmed.com/biotoxin-illness/
  182. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC145304/
  183. https://journals.asm.org/doi/abs/10.1128/cmr.16.1.144-172.2003
  184. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/full/10.1164/rccm.200909-1350oc
  185. https://www.survivingmold.com/docs/Volmer_Chronic_Inflammatory_Response_Syndrome.pdf
  186. https://www.acmt.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/PS_250813_ACMT-Position-Statement-Mold-Related-Inhalation-Exposures.pdf
  187. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31608429/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.