Mycotoxin reduction in wheat grains
- Identification
- How does it work?
- What can it be used for?
- What can it not be used for?
- Implementation
- Related Facilities
- Further Information
Identification
| Key words | Mycotoxin, fungi, deoxynivalenol (DON), peripheral tissues, milling, debranning, dehulling, contamination, wheat, sorting |
|---|---|
| Latest version | 2012/11/27 |
| Completed by | INRA - IATE |
How does it work?
| Primary objective | reduce mycotoxin contamination in wheat lots | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Working principle | This method showed that:
- during the milling processes, the deoxynivalenol (DON) is concentrated in both the fractions corresponding to the most peripheral tissues and the finest particles generated from the operating units - the content of both the fungus (Fusarium type) and its product, the mycotoxin (DON), appears to decrease around the aleurone layer (probably next to the testa-aleurone border). Consequently, it is highly suggested to choose debranning/dehulling over milling to reduce DON level in the products. Due to an effective reduction of grain mass by grain processing using debranning methods, the mycotoxin will be removed | |||
| Images | | |||
| Additional effects | ||||
| Important process parameters | It is highly suggested to choose debranning/dehulling over milling. Milling would increase the contact between the contaminated tissues and the flour, resulting in a contaminated product. | |||
| Important product parameters |
What can it be used for?
| Products | Durum wheat, common wheat |
|---|---|
| Operations | Grinding, milling, debranning/dehulling |
| Solutions for short comings | Reduction of mycotoxins/contaminants |
What can it NOT be used for?
| Products | any other product than wheat |
|---|---|
| Operations | Other operations than separation (by grinding, milling, debranning/dehulling) |
| Other limitations | The method does not allow to reach a 100% elimination rate |
| Risks or hazards |
Implementation
| Maturity | This method has not been implemented on industrial scale yet.
It should be coupled with other mycotoxin reduction methods (such as grain size sorting, colour sorting, etc.) |
|---|---|
| Modularity /Implementation | This technology should be applied prior to the conventional production line (i.e. before milling) |
| Consumer aspects | Consumers will definitely benefit from higher reduction of the amount of potentially toxic molecules |
| Legal aspects | The European law N°1881, 2006 describes the deoxynivalenol (DON) acceptable tresholds within several conditions:
Durum wheat 1750 µg.kg-1 Semolina, pasta 750 µg.kg-1 Common wheat 1250 µg.kg-1 Flour, bread 500 µg.kg-1 Infant food 200 µg.kg-1 (3) |
| Environmental aspects | Debranning/dehulling is an energy consuming process |
Facilities that might be interesting for you
| warning.pngSome use of "<nowiki>[[</nowiki>" in your query was not closed by a matching "]]". |
Further Information
| Institutes | INRA - IATE, INRA - MYCSA |
|---|---|
| Companies | |
| References | (1) Rios G., Pinson-Gadais L., Abecassis J., Zakhia-Rozis N. and Lullien-Pellerin V., 2009. Assessment of dehulling efinciency to reduce deoxynivalenol and Fusarium level in durum wheat grains. J cereal Sci. 49, 387-392
(2) Rios G., Zakhia-Rozis N., Chaurand M., Richard-Forget F., Samson M.F., Abecassis J., and Lullien-Pellerin V. 2009. Impact of durum wheat milling on deoxynivalenol distribution in the outcoming fractions. Food Additives and Contaminants. 26, 487-495 (3) Commission Regulation (EU) No 165/2010 of 26 February 2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006 setting maximum levels for certain contaminants in foodstuffs as regards mycotoxins. |