Aflatoxin M₁: biological decontamination methods in milk and cheese

Abstract

Dairy cattle when fed on aflatoxin B₁ may excrete aflatoxin M₁ in milk as a consequence of dietary exposure. Once AFM₁ is excreted in milk, it is present in dairy products such as cheese, yogurt, among others. This mycotoxin is quite resistant to temperature therefore heat treatments like pasteurization and ultra-pasteurization are not enough to inactivate it. In this context, this article provides an overview of the biological decontamination methods on milk and cheese of the last decade, as a contribution to evaluate the evolution of this strategy as well as its efficiency according to their authors. Relevant studies published between January 2009 and May 2019 were selected after a systematic search of the literature in PubMed, Science direct and Google Scholar databases. According with our research in the last decade few studies have been published on these methods and unfortunately none of the published studies tested such methods in cheese. Throughout the research many studies on decontamination methods were found, however, in phosphate buffered saline solution or in culture medium. Further studies on biological decontamination on milk and mainly on cheese are necessary for this technique to be better developed and applied to a large scale in the industries.

Keywords:
Aflatoxin; biological decontamination; cheese; milk; systematic review

1 Introduction

Aflatoxins are the most widely known and distributed mycotoxins in foods and feeds (Wochner et al., 2018). Aflatoxins, mainly aflatoxin B₁ (AFB₁) are potent carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic agents. When lactating animals are fed with feed containing aflatoxins (mainly AFB₁), these are biotransformed resulting in a new compound denominated aflatoxin M₁ (AFM₁), which is soluble and excreted in the milk of these animals (Fink-Gremmels, 2008; Gonçalves et al., 2015b). According to the World Health Organization and the International Agency for Research on Cancer both AFB₁ and AFM₁ are classified as belonging to group 1, carcinogenic to humans (World Health Organization, 2002).

Several studies have demonstrated evidence of human exposure to aflatoxin M₁ due to the consumption of contaminated milk and dairy products (Bovo et al., 2013; Campagnollo et al., 2016; Corassin et al., 2013; Fernandes et al., 2012; Shundo et al., 2009; Trombete et al., 2013; Womack et al., 2016).

Once in the milk, AFM₁ is not degraded and can resist different industrial treatments including milk sterilization or to any other heat treatment (Campagnollo et al., 2016; Assaf et al., 2019). Milk and dairy products are frequently consumed by a portion of the population considered vulnerable, such as children and the elderly (Fallah et al., 2009; Prandini et al., 2009). For the reasons mentioned above, AFM₁ contamination is a serious health problem.

Knowledge about the negative impacts of aflatoxins on the economy and health led to investigations for strategies to prevent their formation in food, as well as to eliminate, inactivate or reduce the bioavailability of these toxins in contaminated products (Corassin et al., 2013; Gonçalves et al., 2015a). Improvements in agricultural practices, antifungal agents and genetic engineering may be used as a means of prevention (González et al., 2005). Aflatoxin elimination or inactivation may be achieved by physical, chemical and biological methods (Corassin et al., 2013).

Physical and chemical methods are not the most appropriate in terms of safety, economy and product quality, either because they are not efficient at removing contaminants, or high costs and nutritional and sensory damage to the product (Stoev, 2013; Wochner et al., 2018). Thus, the biological methods emerged and gained popularity due to its friendliness to both environment and body health (Peng et al., 2018).

In this context the aim of this study was to review the biological methods of aflatoxin M₁ decontamination in milk and cheese published in the last decade as a contribution to evaluate the evolution of this strategy as well as its efficiency according to its authors.

2 Search strategy

The bibliographic research, inclusion and exclusion criteria and data collection were performed based on the protocol Cochrane (Higgins, 2011). Relevant studies published between January 2009 to May 2019 were selected after a systematic search in the following databases PubMed, Science Direct and Google Scholar databases, using key words like: “Aflatoxin M₁^”, probiotics and lactic acid bacteria binding OR “Aflatoxin M₁ in milk”, probiotics and lactic acid bacteria binding OR “biological degradation”, aflatoxin M₁ in dairy products OR “biological binding”, aflatoxin M₁ in milk.

2.1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

During first screening, the full texts of potentially eligible articles were downloaded. Then, the citations transferred were examined twice for inclusion and final eligibility criteria. The inclusion criteria were: (1) Cross-sectional descriptive data, (2) Full-text article available (3) Original research studies, (4) Decontamination method used and (5) Type of product examined (milk or cheese). In addition, in order to avoid any error in the translation process and also the clarity of data expression, based on previously published meta-analysis studies in Food Science (Cherkani-Hassani et al., 2016; Khaneghah et al., 2018), only articles published in English were included. Citations that did not meet these criteria were excluded.

2.2 Data collection

After screening, 405 articles were retrieved and evaluated for eligibility. 394 articles were excluded in the initial evaluation due to duplicates or based on their title and abstract content. Finally, 11 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review.

3 Aflatoxin M_1, milk, cheese and decontamination methods

3.1 Aflatoxin M₁ synthesis and excretion

One of the most widely known and largely distributed mycotoxin groups in food, with proven toxic properties are aflatoxins (Campagnollo et al., 2016; Varga et al., 2015) can be produced by approximately twenty species of three different species of the genus Aspergillus, being Aspergillus flavus the main aflatoxins producer (Elsanhoty et al., 2014).

The occurrence of aflatoxins in food is unavoidable and influenced by environmental factors. The extent of its contamination is not predictable and may vary with agronomic practices and product susceptibility to fungus invasion during the pre-harvest, storage and processing stages (Araújo, 2012). Aspergillus spp. grows on a wide variety of substrates, and most food and feed are susceptible to invasion by aflatoxigenic strains at any stage of production, processing or storage (Oliveira & Corassin, 2014). In this context, aflatoxins can be found as natural contaminants in cereals, cereal by-products, oilseeds, cassava, and a whole set of foods for humans such as dried fruit, spices, oilseeds, milk and dairy products (Bhat et al., 2010; Gonçalves et al., 2015b).

Aflatoxins are present throughout the world, but mainly in tropical climate areas. Their appearance in agricultural products occurs in hot and humid weather conditions, and in poor or inadequate storage facilities. The most influential factors on the growth and production of aflatoxins are air humidity and temperature, being optimum humidity above 80% and the maximum toxin production temperature between 25 and 27 °C (Abbas, 2005; Spinosa et al., 2008). Aflatoxin production can be influenced by some other factors such as: substrate composition, pH, oxygen and carbon dioxide content, microbial competition, mechanical damage, contaminant fungus lineage, plant stress and use of fungicides (Hussein & Brasel, 2001; Magan & Olsen, 2006).

Nutrition is one of the most important factors in dairy production, representing the main cost in this activity. Nutrient requirements of dairy cows vary according to the stage of pregnancy and lactation. The nutrients required by dairy cows are energy, fiber, protein, water, vitamins and minerals. Pasture provides a balanced source of feed, however is not enough to maintain high-producing dairy cows. Energy is the decisive factor in milk production: it determines milk yield and composition, as well as body weight. The main energy sources in dairy cow feed are carbohydrates and fiber (corn silage, ground corn, whole cottonseed, high moisture shelled corn, corn gluten meal, soybean hulls and meal). Protein and fats in feeds can also be used as energy sources (Gonçalves et al., 2015b).

Dairy cattle feed may be naturally and simultaneously contaminated by several fungi that are able to produce different toxins. According to Alonso et al. (2013) most of the silage is made up from annual crops. Therefore, mycotoxin concentration in the feed may vary annually. Several species in the genera Aspergillus, Penicillium, Alternaria, Trichoderma, Claviceps and others make up the storage microbiota and are responsible for the production of mycotoxins found in grains and forage (Gonçalves et al., 2015b).

Dairy cattle are highly exposed to the action of mycotoxins due to their dependence on stored and bulky concentrates such as hay or silage (Jobim et al., 2001). Ruminants are less susceptible to the effects of mycotoxins because the rumen to be populated by microorganisms (fungi, bacteria, protozoa, archaea). Among these, protozoans are the major microorganisms responsible for mycotoxin detoxification (Gonçalves et al., 2015b). This process, however, is not always efficient and some toxic metabolites can be excreted in the milk (European Food Safety Auhority, 2004; Jouany & Diaz, 2005).

When dairy cattle ingest feed containing aflatoxin (mainly AFB₁), part of it is degraded by rumen microorganisms, resulting in the metabolite aflatoxicol (Kuilman et al., 1998). The remaining non-degraded fraction is absorbed by passive diffusion (Fink-Gremmels, 2008) and metabolized in the liver where the biotransformation to AFM₁ occurs being excreted in milk and urine (Murphy et al., 2006; Oatley et al., 2000).

3.2 Prevalence of aflatoxin M₁ in milk and cheese

Milk is the product of complete and uninterrupted milking under healthy conditions of healthy, well fed and rested cows. It is the first food consumed by man and one of the most complete. Milk has essential elements, micronutrients, amino acids and fatty acids in larger portions than in any other product. In addition, it contains high quality proteins, high percentage of calcium and some bioactive substances like enzymes, hormones and cytokines (Food and Agriculture Organization, 2019).

Cheese is one of the oldest foods recorded in the entire history of humanity. The Egyptians are among the first people to domesticate goats and sheep, being also one of the first to use milk and cheese as a source of food (Cruz et al., 2017). The primitive cheese was only coagulated milk, devoid of whey and salty. In the nineteenth century the great boom occurred in the consumption of cheese, after all, its production switched from handmade industrial scale, and the process of pasteurization is fundamental for this shift (Chalita et al., 2009). Throughout the ages, cheese has evolved to what is known today and the great typological variation of cheeses is related to the adaptation of this product to the different tastes and cultural customs (Instituto Estadual do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico de Minas Gerais, 2012).

The occurrence of aflatoxin M₁ in cheese produced from milk contaminated with these toxin is a reality already described by several authors (Armorini et al., 2016; Campagnollo et al., 2016; Fernandes et al., 2012; Hassan et al., 2018; Iha et al., 2011; Kav et al., 2011; Koluacik et al., 2015; Manetta et al., 2009; Shahbazi et al., 2017; Xiong et al., 2018; Yilmaz & Altinci, 2019; Yoon et al., 2016; Zheng et al., 2017). In relation to the presence of AFM₁ in cheeses others factors, further to the presence of toxin in milk should be considered, as: kind of cheese, processing steps, kind of milk used to produce (raw or pasteurized), if there is period of maturation, addition of herbs among others (Campagnollo et al., 2016).

Concerns with the negative impacts of aflatoxins on health and economics has led to the investigation of strategies to prevent their formation in food (mainly feed), as well as to eliminate, inactivate or reduce the availability of these mycotoxins in contaminated products (Bovo et al., 2010; Corassin et al., 2013; Gonçalves et al., 2015a, 2017,).

Contamination may be prevented by good agricultural practices, antifungal agents, genetic engineering and storage control. Mycotoxin elimination or inactivation may be achieved by physical, chemical and biological methods (Corassin et al., 2013; Trombete et al., 2013). However, since these foods are already contaminated, adsorbents can be used in the animal feed, in order to reduce the bioavailability of these mycotoxins and thus avoid the excretion of AFM₁ in milk, as described by (Firmin et al., 2011; Gonçalves et al., 2017).

If the fore-mentioned methods are not applied, and AFM₁ is present in milk, according to Fallah (2010), Manetta et al. (2009) and Trombete et al. (2013), it will be also present in its dairy products (cheese, yogurts, etc.). According to the same authors and Campagnollo et al. (2016) this occurs because AFM₁ is stable at the various stages of processing for the manufacture of dairy products such as pasteurization, UHT, milk coagulation, acidification, etc. In addition Ardic et al. (2009) emphasized that cheese is a potential source of AFM₁ when compared to other dairy products, because AFM₁ is associated with casein, which is highly concentrated during its production.

3.3 Biological methods for decontamination

Several methods have been used to reduce the availability of mycotoxins, especially aflatoxins, in food intended for humans. These methods may be physical, chemical or biological (Bovo et al., 2010).

The main physical methods used to reduce the availability of mycotoxins are thermal inactivation, ultraviolet light, ionizing radiation, or extraction with solvents. Chemical methods include chlorination and oxidant or hydrolytic agents (El-Nezami et al., 1998; Oliveira & Corassin, 2014). However, both chemical and physical methods have advantages and disadvantages, as they do not completely remove completely the toxin, are expensive and cause nutritional and organoleptic losses to the products (Magan & Olsen, 2006). Therefore, the use of microorganisms to degrade mycotoxins has become an attractive alternative for control or reducing the bioavailability of these toxins in food (Corassin et al., 2013; Fazeli et al., 2009; Gonçalves et al., 2015b).

Biological methods are based on the action of microorganisms such as yeasts, molds, bacteria and algae on mycotoxins, through competition for nutrients and space, interaction and antibiosis (Fazeli et al., 2009). In addition, these decontamination methods have been well studied since they are efficient, cost-effective, and in many cases are already used in food production, such as acid lactic bacteria and yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Corassin et al., 2013; Gonçalves et al., 2015a).

According to the criteria of inclusion and exclusion of the research, eleven articles, published in the last decade, on biological methods of decontamination in milk and cheese, shown in Table 1, were selected.

Table 1
Biological methods of decontamination in milk in different countries in the last 10 years (2009 to date).

Kind of Sample analyzed	Initial and final concentration of toxin (µg/L1 or µg/kg2)	Decontamination range (%)	Contact time (minutes)	Biological method and concentration	Reference
Milk	0.08-01	100	40	Saccharomyces cerevisiae immobilizated with perlite 108 CFU/mL	Foroughi et al. (2019)
	0.23-0.0431	81.3	80
Skim Milk	150-121.81	18.8	960	Lactobacillus rhamnosus 1010 CFU/mL	Abdallah et al. (2018)
	150-110.11	26.6		Lactobacillus rhamnosus heat-treated 1010 CFU/mL
Skim milk	50-9.721	80.5	720	Pool of microorganismsc heat-treated 109 CFU/mL	Abdelmotilib et al. (2018)
	50-6.681	86.6	1440
	50-5.701	88.6	2880
	50-4.561	90.9	4320
Milk	0.05-0.00282	94.5	120	Lactobacillus plantarum heat-treated 108 CFU/mL	Kuharić et al. (2018)
Milk	0.05-01	100	60	Lactobacillus helveticcus 1010 CFU/mL	Ismail et al. (2017)
				Pool of microorganismsa
				Saccharomyces cerevisiae 1010 CFU/mL
	0.01- 0.00081	92.0		Saccharomyces cerevisiae 1010 CFU/mL
	0.01-0.00131	87.0		Pool of microorganismsa
Milk	0.050-0.030	30.9	1440	Lactobacillus acidophillus 108 CFU/mL	El-Kest et al. (2016)
	0.050-0.010	78.3	2880
	0.050-0.022	54.8	1440	Bifidobacterium lactis 108 CFU/mL
	0.050-0.019	62.5	2880
	0.050-0.004	91.4	1440	Lactobacillus acidophillus and Bifidobacterium lactis 106 CFU/mL
	0.050-0.002	96.2	2880
Skim milk	200-61.8	69.1	360	Lactobacillus plantarum 108 CFU/mL	Abbès et al. (2013)
	200-46.2	76.9	1440
	200-28.2	85.9	360	Lactobacillus rhamnosus 108 CFU/mL
	200-9.8	95.1	1440
UHT skim milk	0.5-0.0481	90.3	30	Saccharomyces cerevisiae heat-treated 109 CFU/mL	Corassin et al. (2013)
	0.5-0.0371	92.7	60
	0.5-0.4431	11.5	30	Pool of lactic acid bacteriab heat-treated 1010 CFU/mL
	0.5-0.441	11.7	60
	0.5-01	100	60	Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Pool of lactic acid bacteriab 1010 CFU/mL
Milk	10-5.481	45.17	180	Bifidobacterium bifidum 109 CFU/mL	Serrano-Niño et al. (2013)
	10-6.781	32.20		Lactobacillus johnsonii 109 CFU/mL
	10-7.351	26.50		Lactobacillus reuteri 109 CFU/mL
	10-7.551	24.54		Lactobacillus rhamnosus 1010 CFU/mL
UHT skimmed milk	0.5-0.31	37.75	15	Bifidobacterium lactis heat-treated 1010 CFU/mL	Bovo et al. (2013)
	0.5-0.33	32.24		Lactobacillus bulgaricus heat-treated 1010 CFU/mL
	0.5-0.37	24.46		Lactobacillus bulgaricus heat-treated 1010 CFU/mL
Skim milk	50-26.91	46.1	120	Lactobacillus bulgaricus 106 CFU/mL	El Khoury et al. (2011)
	50-20.81	58.5	360
	50-38.71	22.6	120	Streptococcus thermophilus 106 CFU/mL
	50-31.21	37.7	360

• ¹
  µg/L;
• ²
  µg/kg;
• ^a
  Lactobacillus plantarum, Lactobacillus helveticus, Lactococcus lactis and Saccharomyces cerevisiae (2:1:1:1);
• ^b
  Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii spp. Bulgaricus and Bifidobacterium lactis;
• ^c
  Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus plantarum, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Kluyveromyces lactis.

4 Challenges and implications of aflatoxin M₁ methods of decontamination in milk and cheese

Although the occurrence of aflatoxins in milk and dairy products has been frequently reported, there is little information about biological decontaminating in these products. In the last decade, some studies around the world validated microbial decontamination of aflatoxin M₁ as the most promising strategy due to their effectiveness, specificity and environmental friendly behavior to reduce or eliminate possible contamination by aflatoxins (Ismail et al., 2016) .

The main concern with exposure to aflatoxin M₁ and consumption of dairy products is the exposure of children and the elderly (Fallah, 2010). Decontamination procedures may be physical, chemical and biological, should not modify the nutritional or technological milk and dairy products properties and be affordable and easy to use (Lee et al., 2015). Physical and chemical methods are not the most appropriate regarding safety, economy and the quality of treated products high costs or they result in nutritional and sensory damage to the product (Wochner et al., 2018). In this context the proposal of biological methods of decontamination, aflatoxins or mycotoxins in general, is to improve the quality and safety of the products.

The application of biological methods for decontamination of aflatoxins has been noticeably in recent years, resulting in new data as the studies reported in Table 1.

Foroughi et al. (2019) tested the decontamination of milk samples contaminated with different concentrations of AFM₁ (0.08; 0.13; 0.18; 0.23 μg/L) using S. cerevisiae 10⁸ (CFU/mL) immobilized with perlite. The milk samples were passed through the biofilter at three different treatment times (20, 40 and 80 minutes). For the milk sample with a lower concentration of AFM₁ (0.08 μg/L) 40 minutes treatment was sufficient to eliminate all the toxin. However, in the sample with the highest concentration (0.23 μg/L), the best result 81.3% was obtained only at the highest circulation time. According to the authors, the amount of AFM₁ removed is related to the initial concentration of toxin and the time of circulation, in general the longer the treatment, the lower concentration of AFM₁ residue is present in milk. In addition, the authors report that the processing influenced the microbial load of the milk, which increased linearly with the increase of the circulation time (P <0.05); concluding that the shortest circulation time would be the most desirable. Despite the increase in microbial load, the physicochemical properties of the milk did not change. The authors conclude that the use of S. cerevisiae immobilized with perlite may be a practical solution to address the problem of contamination of aflatoxins in dairy products.

Kuharić et al. (2018) selected, isolated and identified ten species of lactic acid bacteria from milk and dairy products with the objective to select a strain which binds more effectively to AFM₁. In addition, they assessed whether the heat treatment of LAB would affect binding ability. For this, the authors selected 10 species of LAB, which could be used viable or treated at the concentration of 10⁸ (CFU/mL). These BALs were added to milk containing AFM₁ (0.05 μg/L) and the binding capacity was evaluated after 2, 4 and 24 hours. The authors reported that binding efficiency ranged from 21 to 92% for viable cells and from 26 to 94.5 for thermally treated cells. According to Kuharić et al. (2018) although the mechanisms of action of lactic acid bacteria on aflatoxins has not yet been fully elucidated, some studies suggest that AFM₁ molecules bind physically to cell wall components, mainly polysaccharides and peptidoglycans, instead of creating covalent bonds with or being metabolized by lactic acid bacteria. In addition, they emphasize that the heat treatment seems to increase the binding surface for AFM₁, providing not only the wall of the lactic acid bacteria cell, but also other components. Finally, these authors conclude that the binding of AFM₁-LAB is reversible, and that the percentage of reversibility is greater in untreated cells.

Ismail et al. (2017) evaluated three strains of lactic acid bacteria, one strain of S. cerevisiae and a mixture of all, in relation to their ability to reduce AFM₁ in milk. Samples were contaminated with different concentrations of AFM₁ (0.05 and 0.01 μg/L) and four different concentrations of microorganisms were tested (10⁷, 10⁸, 10⁹, 10¹⁰ CFU/mL). The authors reported that significant differences were observed in relation to the binding capacity of the different concentrations of microorganisms in the different concentrations of AFM₁. They observed that the binding capacity of each microorganism is directly proportional to its concentration, i.e., maximum binding capacity was recorded at 10¹⁰ CFU/mL and minimum at 10⁷ CFU/mL. The authors also reported that the general trend of binding by microorganisms was found in the following order S. cerevisiae > pool of microorganisms > Lactobaccilus helveticus > Lactobacillus plantarum > Lactococcus lactis. Finally, the authors concluded that the 10¹⁰ CFU/mL concentration can be used efficiently to reduce AFM₁ levels to the limit considered safe by legislation; the AFM₁-LAB binding is a reversible process, since lavage of the complex results in the release of AFM₁. Similarly, (Corassin et al., 2013) evaluated the ability of S. cerevisiae and pool of three different lactic acid bacteria (Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii spp. bulgaricus e Bifidobacterium lactis) alone or in combination to bind AFM₁ in UHT milk skim spiked 0.5 µg AFM₁/L. All the lactic acid bacteria (10¹⁰ CFU/mL) and S. cerevisiae (10⁹ CFU/mL) cells were heat killed (100 °C, 60 minutes) and then used for checking the effect of contact time (30 or 60 minutes). These authors reported that S. cerevisiae showed higher capability to bind AFM₁ in milk than lactic acid bacteria pool and when using S. cerevisiae and lactic acid bacteria pool associated a significant increase observed in the percentage of AFM₁ bound. In agreement Abdelmotilib et al. (2018) reported that lactic acid bacteria and yeast strains can detox AFM₁ in contaminated milk. However, a combination of LABs and yeasts could be better for removal and elimination of AFM₁ from milk. Furthermore, these authors emphasize that bacteria and yeasts could be used as food additives to reduce the bioavailability of the aflatoxins in dairy products.

El Khoury et al. (2011) reported that when lactic acid bacteria cultures (Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus) in PBS and skimmed processing milk were compared, the binding was much greater in milk. According to these authors the main reason of that is may be due to the binding properties of AFM₁ to milk casein. Furthermore, they emphasized that binding level of AFM₁ by L. bulgaricus increased with time and as they expected S. thermophilus showed a lower binding capacity to removal AFM₁ making in comparison to L. bulgaricus. In conclusion the authors reported that LAB seem to play a crucial role in AFM₁ removal.

Bovo et al. (2013) compared treatments for binding AFM₁ in skimmed milk in two different temperatures 4 and 37 °C (last T°C the results are show in Table 1. The binding percentage of AFM₁ in UHT skimmed milk at 4 °C was 13.51, 19.7 and 37.75 for L. bulgaricus, L. rhamnosus and B. lactis, respectively. These Authors reported that the temperature is no significant difference for L. rhmanosus and B. lactis, only for L. bulgaricus at 37 °C. In addition, Bovo et al. (2013) emphasizes that the LAB/AFM₁ complex was unstable and the amount of toxin released to the solution varied widely from strain to strain. Corroborating with this Serrano-Niño et al. (2013) reported that AFM₁ binding capacity was reversible process since all strain tested released a small portion of bound AFM₁ after a single wash with PBS. Furthermore, these authors emphasized that variations in binding abilities among strains suggest that different binding sites could be present in different strain and there could be differences between sites in each bacterium.

5 Conclusions

Worldwide contamination of milk and cheese with aflatoxin M₁ has been raised as a crucial issue, which becomes more critical mainly due to potential dietary exposure of children and the elderly. Some studies around the world validated microbial decontamination of aflatoxin M₁ as the most promising strategy due to their effectiveness and environmentally friendly behavior.

Our study reviewed biological methods for decontamination of aflatoxin M₁ in milk and cheese, as well as challenges and implications on these methods. We observed that in the last decade few studies have been published on these methods and unfortunately none of the published studies tested such methods in cheese. Throughout the research were found many studies on decontamination methods however in phosphate buffered saline solution or in culture medium. Further studies on biological methods for decontamination in milk and mainly in cheeses and dairy products are necessary for this technique to be better developed and applied to large scale industries.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank São Paulo Research of Foundation (FAPESP) for the fellowship (Grant #2017/20081-6 and #2017/19683-1) and this study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) – Finance Code 001.

• Practical Application: One of the main objectives of the food industry is to avoid mycotoxin contamination in processes and products. Microbial decontamination of aflatoxin M₁ as the most promising strategy due to their effectiveness and environmentally friendly behavior.

References

• Abbas, H. K. (2005). Aflatoxin and food safety Boca Raton: CRC Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781420028171
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781420028171
• Abbès, S., Salah-Abbès, J. B., Sharafi, H., Jebali, R., Noghabi, K. A., & Oueslati, R. (2013). Ability of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GAF01 to remove AFM₁ in vitro and to counteract AFM₁ immunotoxicity in vivo. Journal of Immunotoxicology, 10(3), 279-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1547691X.2012.718810 PMid:23030351.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1547691X.2012.718810
• Abdallah, M. F., Ameye, M., Saeger, D. S., Audenaert, K., & Haesaert, G. (2018). Biological control of mycotoxigenic fungi and their toxins : an update for the pre-harvest approach. In Njobeh, P.B., & Stepman, F. (Eds.), Fungi and mycotoxins - their occurrence, impact and health and economy. London: INTECHOPEN. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76342
  » https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.76342
• Abdelmotilib, N., Hamad, G., Elderea, H., Salem, E., & Sohaimy, S. (2018). Aflatoxin M₁ reduction in milk by a novel combination of probiotic bacterial and yeast strains. European Journal of Nutrition & Food Safety, 8(2), 83-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/EJNFS/2018/39486
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.9734/EJNFS/2018/39486
• Alonso, V. A., Pereyra, C. M., Keller, L. A. M., Dalcero, A. M., Rosa, C. A. R., Chiacchiera, S. M., & Cavaglieri, L. R. (2013). Fungi and mycotoxins in silage: an overview. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 115(3), 637-643. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jam.12178 PMid:23445404.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jam.12178
• Araújo, A. J. M. (2012). Aflatoxinas. In A. J. M. Araújo. Química de alimentos: teoria e prática (5. ed., pp. 340–352). Viçosa: Universidade Federal de Viçosa.
• Ardic, M., Karakaya, Y., Atasever, M., & Adiguzel, G. (2009). Aflatoxin M₁ levels of Turkish white brined cheese. Food Control, 20(3), 196-199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.04.003
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.04.003
• Armorini, S., Altafini, A., Zaghini, A., & Roncada, P. (2016). Occurrence of aflatoxin M₁ in conventional and organic milk offered for sale in Italy. Mycotoxin Research, 32(4), 237-246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12550-016-0256-8 PMid:27632224.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12550-016-0256-8
• Assaf, J. C., Khoury, A. E., Chokr, A., Louka, N., & Atoui, A. (2019). A novel method for elimination of aflatoxin M₁ in milk using Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG biofilm. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 72(2), 1-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.12578
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.12578
• Bhat, R., Rai, R. V., & Karim, A. A. (2010). Mycotoxins in food and feed : present status and future concerns. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 9(1), 57-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00094.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00094.x
• Bovo, F., Corassin, C. H., & Oliveira, C. A. F. (2010). Descontaminação de aflatoxinas em alimentos por bactérias ácido-láticas. Journal of Health Science, 12(2), 15-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.17921/2447-8938
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.17921/2447-8938
• Bovo, F., Corassin, C. H., Rosim, R. E., & de Oliveira, C. A. F. (2013). Efficiency of Lactic Acid Bacteria Strains for Decontamination of Aflatoxin M₁ in Phosphate Buffer Saline Solution and in Skimmed Milk. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 6(8), 2230-2234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-011-0770-9
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-011-0770-9
• Campagnollo, F. B., Ganev, K. C., Khaneghah, A. M., Portela, J. B., Cruz, A. G., Granato, D., Corassin, C. H., Oliveira, C. A. F., & Sant’Ana, A. S. (2016). The occurrence and effect of unit operations for dairy products processing on the fate of aflatoxin M₁: a review. Food Control, 68, 310-329. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.04.007
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.04.007
• Chalita, M. A. N., Silva, R. O. P., Petti, R. H. V., & Silva, C. R. L. (2009). Algumas considerações sobre a fragilidade das concepções de qualidades no mercado de queijos no Brasil. Informações Econômicas, 39(6), 78-88.
• Cherkani-Hassani, A., Mojemmi, B., & Mouane, N. (2016). Occurrence and levels of mycotoxins and their metabolites in human breast milk associated to dietary habits and other factors : A systematic literature review, 1984 e 2015. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 50, 56-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.01.024
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.01.024
• Corassin, C. H., Bovo, F., Rosim, R. E., & Oliveira, C. A. F. (2013). Efficiency of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and lactic acid bacteria strains to bind aflatoxin M₁ in UHT skim milk. Food Control, 31(1), 80-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.033
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.033
• Cruz, A., Oliveira, C. A. F., Corassin, C., & Sá, P. (2017). Processamento de produtos lácteos: queijos, leites fermentados, bebidas lácteas, sorvete, manteiga, creme de leite, doce de leite, soro em pó e lácteos funcionais (Coleção Lácteos, Vol. 3). Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier.
• El Khoury, A., Atoui, A., & Yaghi, J. (2011). Analysis of aflatoxin M₁ in milk and yogurt and AFM₁ reduction by lactic acid bacteria used in Lebanese industry. Food Control, 22(10), 1695-1699. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.04.001
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.04.001
• El-Kest, M. M., El-Hariri, M., Khafaga, N. I. W., & Refai, M. K. (2016). Studies on contamination of dairy products by Aflatoxin M₁ and its control by probiotics. Journal of Global Bioscience, 4(1), 1294-1312.
• El-Nezami, H., Kankaanpaa, P., Salminen, S., & Ahokas, J. (1998). Ability of dairy strains of lactic acid bacteria to bind a common food carcinogen, aflatoxin B₁ Food and Chemical Toxicology, 36(4), 321-326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0278-6915(97)00160-9 PMid:9651049.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0278-6915(97)00160-9
• Elsanhoty, R. M., Salam, S. A., Ramadan, M. F., & Badr, F. H. (2014). Detoxification of aflatoxin M₁ in yoghurt using probiotics and lactic acid bacteria. Food Control, 43, 129-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.03.002
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.03.002
• European Food Safety Auhority – EFSA. (2004). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain on request grom the Commission related to Aflatoxin B1 as undesirable substance in animal feed. The EFSA Journal, 39, 1-27. Retrieved from: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2004.39
  » https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2004.39
• Fallah, A. A. (2010). Assessment of aflatoxin M₁ contamination in pasteurized and UHT milk marketed in central part of Iran. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 48(3), 988-991. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2010.01.014 PMid:20093164.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2010.01.014
• Fallah, A. A., Jafari, T., Fallah, A., & Rahnama, M. (2009). Determination of aflatoxin M₁ levels in Iranian white and cream cheese. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 47(8), 1872-1875. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2009.04.042 PMid:19426778.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2009.04.042
• Fazeli, M. R., Hajimohammadali, M., Moshkani, A., Samadi, N., Jamalifar, H., Khoshayand, M. R., Vaghari, E., & Pouragahi, S. (2009). Aflatoxin B₁ binding capacity of Autochthonous strains of lactic acid bacteria. Journal of Food Protection, 72(1), 189-192. http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-72.1.189 PMid:19205485.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-72.1.189
• Fernandes, A. M., Corrêa, B., Rosim, R. E., Kobashigawa, E., & Oliveira, C. A. F. (2012). Distribution and stability of aflatoxin M₁ during processing and storage of Minas Frescal cheese. Food Control, 24(1-2), 104-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.09.010
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.09.010
• Fink-Gremmels, J. (2008). The role of mycotoxins in the health and performance of dairy cows. Veterinary journal (London, England : 1997), 176(1), 84-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.12.034 PMid:18342554.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.12.034
• Firmin, S., Morgavi, D. P., Yiannikouris, A., & Boudra, H. (2011). Effectiveness of modified yeast cell wall extracts to reduce aflatoxin B₁ absorption in dairy ewes. Journal of Dairy Science, 94(11), 5611-5619. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-4446 PMid:22032384.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-4446
• Food and Agriculture Organization – FAO. (2019). Milk Rome: FAO. Retrieved from: http://www.fao.org/dairy-production-products/processing/en/
  » http://www.fao.org/dairy-production-products/processing/en/
• Foroughi, M., Sarabi Jamab, M., Keramat, J., & Najaf Najafi, M. (2019). The use of Saccharomyces cerevisiae immobilized on activated alumina, and alumina silicate beads for the reduction of Aflatoxin M₁ in vitro. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 43(2), 1-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13876
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13876
• Gonçalves, B. L., Corassin, C. H., & Oliveira, C. A. F. (2015b). Mycotoxicoses in dairy cattle: a review. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances, 10(11), 752-760. http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2015.752.760
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2015.752.760
• Gonçalves, B. L., Gonçalves, J. L., Rosim, R. E., Cappato, L. P., Cruz, A. G., Oliveira, C. A. F., & Corassin, C. H. (2017). Effects of different sources of Saccharomyces cerevisiae biomass on milk production, composition, and aflatoxin M₁ excretion in milk from dairy cows fed aflatoxin B₁ Journal of Dairy Science, 100(7), 5701-5708. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12215 PMid:28478008.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12215
• Gonçalves, B. L., Rosim, R. E., Oliveira, C. A. F., & Corassin, C. H. (2015a). The in vitro ability of different Saccharomyces cerevisiae - based products to bind Aflatoxin B₁ Food Control, 47, 298-300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.07.024
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.07.024
• González, E., Felicio, M., Rossi, M. H., Nogueita, J. H., & Manginelli, S. (2005). Ocorrência de aflatoxina M₁ em leite comercializado em alguns municípios do estado de são paulo. Arquivos do Instituto Biológico, 72(4), 435-438. http://dx.doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2014v35n1p371
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5433/1679-0359.2014v35n1p371
• Hassan, Z., Al-Thani, R., Atia, F., Almeer, S., Balmas, V., Migheli, Q., & Jaoua, S. (2018). Evidence of low levels of aflatoxin M₁ in milk and dairy products marketed in Qatar. Food Control, 92, 25-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.04.038
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.04.038
• Higgins, J. P. (2011). Cochrane handbook for conducting systematic reviews Londres: The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved from: http://handbook.cochrane.org/
  » http://handbook.cochrane.org/
• Hussein, H. S., & Brasel, J. M. (2001). Toxicity, metabolism, and impact of mycotoxins on humans and animals. Toxicology, 167(2), 101-134. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-483X(01)00471-1 PMid:11567776.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0300-483X(01)00471-1
• Iha, M. H., Barbosa, C. B., Okada, I. A., & Trucksess, M. W. (2011). Occurrence of aflatoxin M₁ in dairy products in Brazil. Food Control, 22(12), 1971-1974. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.05.013
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.05.013
• Instituto Estadual do Patrimônio Histórico e Artístico de Minas Gerais – IEPHA. (2012). História do queijo Belo Horizonte: IEPHA. Retrieved from: http://www.iepha.mg.gov.br
  » http://www.iepha.mg.gov.br
• Ismail, A., Akhtar, S., Levin, R. E., Ismail, T., Riaz, M., & Amir, M. (2016). Aflatoxin M₁: Prevalence and decontamination strategies in milk and milk products. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 42(3), 418-427. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1040841X.2014.958051 PMid:25853494.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/1040841X.2014.958051
• Ismail, A., Levin, R. E., Riaz, M., Akhtar, S., Gong, Y. Y., & Oliveira, C. A. F. (2017). Effect of different microbial concentrations on binding of aflatoxin M₁ and stability testing. Food Control, 73, 492-496. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.08.040
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2016.08.040
• Jobim, C. C., Gonçalves, G. D., & Santos, G. T. (2001). Qualidade sanitária de grãos e de forragens conservadas versus desempenho animal e qualidade de seus produtos. In Simpósio sobre produção e utilização de forragens conservadas (pp. 242–261). Maringá: UEM.
• Jouany, J. P., & Diaz, D. E. (2005). Effects of mycotoxins in ruminants. In D. E. Diaz (Ed.). The mycotoxins blue book (pp. 295–321). Nottingham: University Press.
• Kav, K., Col, R., & Kaan Tekinsen, K. (2011). Detection of aflatoxin M₁ levels by ELISA in white-brined Urfa cheese consumed in Turkey. Food Control, 22(12), 1883-1886. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.04.030
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.04.030
• Khaneghah, A. M., Fakhri, Y., Raeisi, S., Armoon, B., & Sant, A. S. (2018). Prevalence and concentration of ochratoxin A, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol and total aflatoxin in cereal-based products : a systematic review and meta- analysis. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 118, 830-848. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.06.037 PMid:29935247.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.06.037
• Koluacik, A., Sivri, G. T., & Kaptan, B. (2015). Aflatoxin M₁ determination in Traditional Küp Cheese Samples of Turkey using immunoaffinity column and high-performance liquid chromatography. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology, 3(12), 916-919. http://dx.doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v3i12.916-919.504
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v3i12.916-919.504
• Kuharić, Ž., Jakopović, Ž., Čanak, I., Frece, J., Bošnir, J., Pavlek, Ž., Ivešić, M., & Markov, K. (2018). Removing aflatoxin M₁ from milk with native lactic acid bacteria, centrifugation and filtration. Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 69(4), 334-339. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/aiht-2018-69-3160 PMid:30864375.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/aiht-2018-69-3160
• Kuilman, E. M., Maas, R. F. M., Judah, D. J., & Fink-gremmels, J. (1998). Bovine hepatic metabolism of Aflatoxin B₁ Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 8561(7), 2707-2713. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf980062x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/jf980062x
• Lee, J., Her, J., & Lee, K. (2015). Reduction of aflatoxins (B₁, B₂, G₁, and G₂) in soybean-based model systems. Food Chemistry, 189, 45-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.02.013 PMid:26190599.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.02.013
• Magan, N., & Olsen, M. (2006). Mycotoxins in food: detection and control Boca Raton: CRC Press.
• Manetta, A. C., Giammarco, M., Giuseppe, L. D., Fusaro, I., Gramenzi, A., Formigoni, A., Vignola, G., & Lambertini, L. (2009). Distribution of aflatoxin M₁ during Grana Padano cheese production from naturally contaminated milk. Food Chemistry, 113(2), 595-599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.07.091
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2008.07.091
• Murphy, P., Hendrich, S., Landgren, C., & Bryant, C. (2006). Food mycotoxins : an update. Journal of Food Science, 71(5), R51-R65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00052.x
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-3841.2006.00052.x
• Oatley, J. T., Rarick, M. D., Ji, G. E. O. G., & Linz, J. E. (2000). Binding of Aflatoxin B₁ to Bifidobacteria in vitro. Journal of Food Protection, 63(8), 1133-1136. http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-63.8.1133 PMid:10945592.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-63.8.1133
• Oliveira, C. A. F., & Corassin, C. H. (2014). Aflatoxins. In S.C. Duarte, A. L. S. Pena & C.M. Lino (Eds.), Mycotoxins and their implications in food safety (pp. 113). London: Future Science Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/ebo.13.468
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.4155/ebo.13.468
• Peng, Z., Chen, L., Zhu, Y., Huang, Y., Hu, X., Wu, Q., Nussler, A. K., Liu, L., & Yang, W. (2018). Current major degradation methods for aflatoxins: a review. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 80, 155-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.08.009
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2018.08.009
• Prandini, A., Tansini, G., Sigolo, S., Filippi, L., Laporta, M., & Piva, G. (2009). On the occurrence of aflatoxin M₁ in milk and dairy products. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 47(5), 984-991. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2007.10.005 PMid:18037552.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2007.10.005
• Serrano-Niño, J. C., Cavazos-Garduño, A., Hernandez-Mendoza, A., Applegate, B., Ferruzzi, M. G., San Martin-González, M. F., & García, H. S. (2013). Assessment of probiotic strains ability to reduce the bioaccessibility of aflatoxin M₁ in artificially contaminated milk using an in vitro digestive model. Food Control, 31(1), 202-207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.023
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.09.023
• Shahbazi, Y., Nikousefat, Z., & Karami, N. (2017). Occurrence, seasonal variation and risk assessment of exposure to aflatoxin M₁ in Iranian traditional cheeses. Food Control, 79, 356-362. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.04.021
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.04.021
• Shundo, L., Navas, S. A., Lamardo, L. C. A., Ruvieri, V., & Sabino, M. (2009). Estimate of aflatoxin M₁ exposure in milk and occurrence in Brazil. Food Control, 20(7), 655-657. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.09.019
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2008.09.019
• Spinosa, H. S., Górniak, S. L., & Palermo-Neto, J. (2008). Toxicologia aplicada à medicina veterinária Barueri: Manole.
• Stoev, S. D. (2013). Food safety and increasing hazard of mycotoxin occurrence in foods and feeds. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 53(9), 887-901. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2011.571800 PMid:23768181.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2011.571800
• Trombete, F. M., Fraga, M. E., & Saldanha, T. (2013). Contaminação de queijos por Aflatoxina M₁: uma abordagem sobre a ocorrência e prevenção. Revista do Instituto de Latícinios Cândido Tostes, 68(392), 40-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/2238-6416.20130027
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/2238-6416.20130027
• Varga, E., Wiesenberger, G., Hametner, C., Ward, T. J., Dong, Y., Schöfbeck, D., McCormick, S., Broz, K., Stuckler, R., Schuhmacher, R., Krska, R., Kistler, H. C., Berthiller, F., & Adam, G. (2015). New tricks of an old enemy: Isolates of Fusarium graminearum produce a type A trichothecene mycotoxin. Environmental Microbiology, 17(8), 2588-2600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12718 PMid:25403493.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1462-2920.12718
• Wochner, K. F., Becker-algeri, T. A., Colla, E., Badiale-Furlong, E., & Drunkler, D. A. (2018). The action of probiotic microorganisms on chemical contaminants in milk. Critical Reviews in Microbiology, 44(1), 112-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1040841X.2017.1329275 PMid:28537817.
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1040841X.2017.1329275
• Womack, E. D., Sparks, D. L., & Brown, A. E. (2016). Aflatoxin M₁ in milk and milk products: a short review. World Mycotoxin Journal, 9(2), 305-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.3920/WMJ2014.1867
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.3920/WMJ2014.1867
• World Health Organization – WHO, & International Agency for Research on Cancer – IARC. (2002). IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Some traditional herbal medicines, some mycotoxins, naphthalene and styrene Paris: WIARC Press. Retrieved from: https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono82.pdf
  » https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono82.pdf
• Xiong, J., Xiong, L., Zhou, H., Liu, Y., & Wu, L. (2018). Occurrence of aflatoxin B₁ in dairy cow feedstuff and aflatoxin M₁ in UHT and pasteurized milk in central China. Food Control, 92, 386-390. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.05.022
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2018.05.022
• Yilmaz, S. Ö., & Altinci, A. (2019). Incidence of aflatoxin M₁ contamination in milk, white cheese, kashar and butter from Sakarya, Turkey. Food Science and Technology, 39(suppl 1), 190-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/fst.40817
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/fst.40817
• Yoon, B. R., Hong, S.-Y., Cho, S. M., Lee, K. R., Kim, M., & Chung, S. H. (2016). Aflatoxin M₁ levels in dairy products from South Korea determined by high performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 55(2), 171-180.
• Zheng, N., Li, S. L., Zhang, H., Min, L., Gao, Y. N., & Wang, J. Q. (2017). A survey of aflatoxin M₁ of raw cow milk in China during the four seasons from 2013 to 2015. Food Control, 78, 176-182. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.02.055
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.02.055

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  09 Oct 2020
• Date of issue
  2022

History

• Received
  17 June 2020
• Accepted
  08 July 2020