Abstract
ABSTRACT A correlation between relative humidity (RH) during storage and moisture content was obtained in wheat subjected to gamma irradiation at 20 krad. The samples were assessed for storage up to 6 months with and without artificial loading of grains with conidia of Aspergillus flavus. The mycotoxin production seemed to be determined by a critical level of moisture in the grain (13%) at RH over 80% at 28°± 2°C. The total aflatoxin produced in the irradiated grains was observed to be lower than in the unirradiated controls. The amount of toxin contained in grains, artificially infected with A. flavus before or after irradiation, did not show appreciable differences. The results, while defining the storage conditions with reference to humidity, did not indicate any alterations in wheat relating to aflatoxin producing potential.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Relative humidity during storage correlated with moisture content of irradiated wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- gamma irradiation at 20 krade0
- Outcome
- moisture contente0
- Setting
- during storagee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A correlation between relative humidity (RH) during storage and moisture content was obtained in wheat subjected to gamma irradiation at 20 krad”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycotoxin production appeared determined by grain moisture at 13% under humid storage.
- Taxon
- WHEATTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- mycotoxin productione0
- Value
- 13%e0
- Setting
- RH over 80% at 28°± 2°Ce0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mycotoxin production seemed to be determined by a critical level of moisture in the grain (13%) at RH over 80% at 28°± 2°C”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Irradiated grains contained less total aflatoxin than unirradiated controls.
- Taxon
- WHEATTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irradiated grainse0
- Outcome
- total aflatoxine0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- unirradiated controlse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The total aflatoxin produced in the irradiated grains was observed to be lower than in the unirradiated controls”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
Infection before versus after irradiation produced no appreciable difference in toxin amount.
- Taxon
- WHEATTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- artificially infected with A. flavus before or after irradiatione0
- Interactor
- A. flavus
Aspergillus flavuse0pathogen - Outcome
- amount of toxin contained in grainse0
- Direction
- did not show appreciable differencese0
- Comparator
- before or after irradiatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The amount of toxin contained in grains, artificially infected with A. flavus before or after irradiation, did not show appreciable differences”
t0“WHEAT”
Claim · model-written summary
The results did not indicate altered aflatoxin producing potential in wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- aflatoxin producing potentiale0
- Direction
- did not indicate any alterationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“did not indicate any alterations in wheat relating to aflatoxin producing potential”
The same questions in other papers
radiation · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.