Abstract
Abstract Maize is prone to aflatoxin contamination prevailing in the high-risk regions in Kenya, where maize is rendered unfit for uses as food and feed. The objective of the study was to identify strategies that can be used to decontaminate aflatoxin in contaminated maize. Therefore, an experiment was conducted using maize from Kilifi contaminated with aflatoxin soaked in different solutions, done as single and combined treatments. Maize grains were used in portions of 250 g for the mitigation experiments and placed in conical flasks of 1 litre capacity and treatment application done. All the treatments were compared to the control with no treatment applied and set to 100%. The results revealed that, aflatoxin was reduced by 78.9% by soaking maize kernels in distilled water for 24 h under a single treatment. Soaking in aqueous ammonia for 24 h reduced aflatoxin by 68.1%. Soaking grains in sodium bisulphite for 24 h reduced by 59.3% and citric acid by 38.8%. The combination of sorting and aqueous ammonia was most effective with 90.8% aflatoxin reduction. The combination of sorting and sodium bisulphite lowered the levels to 72.9%, while citric acid and dehulling were 55.3% effective. Aflatoxin reduction methods to levels that are within the allowable limits of 10 μg/kg and 20 μg/kg will enable grains to be used as human food and livestock feed, respectively. Therefore, effective methods should be adopted by farmers to put maize to good use for human food and livestock feed instead of throwing away or using it with the high levels of aflatoxin.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Soaking maize kernels in distilled water for 24 h reduced aflatoxin by 78.9% relative to the untreated control.
- Treatment
- soaking maize kernels in distilled water for 24 he1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 78.9%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“aflatoxin was reduced by 78.9% by soaking maize kernels in distilled water for 24 h under a single treatment”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
Claim · model-written summary
Soaking in aqueous ammonia for 24 h reduced aflatoxin by 68.1%.
- Treatment
- Soaking in aqueous ammonia for 24 he1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 68.1%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“Soaking in aqueous ammonia for 24 h reduced aflatoxin by 68.1%”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
Claim · model-written summary
Soaking grains in sodium bisulphite for 24 h reduced aflatoxin by 59.3%.
- Treatment
- Soaking grains in sodium bisulphite for 24 he1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine3
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 59.3%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“Soaking grains in sodium bisulphite for 24 h reduced by 59.3%”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
e3“decontaminate aflatoxin”
Claim · model-written summary
Soaking grains in citric acid reduced aflatoxin by 38.8%.
- Treatment
- citric acide1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine3
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 38.8%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“reduced by 59.3% and citric acid by 38.8%”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
e3“decontaminate aflatoxin”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of sorting and aqueous ammonia was the most effective treatment, with 90.8% aflatoxin reduction.
- Treatment
- combination of sorting and aqueous ammoniae1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine1
- Direction
- most effectivee1
- Value
- 90.8%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“The combination of sorting and aqueous ammonia was most effective with 90.8% aflatoxin reduction”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of sorting and sodium bisulphite lowered aflatoxin levels to 72.9%.
- Treatment
- combination of sorting and sodium bisulphitee1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine3
- Direction
- lowerede1
- Value
- 72.9%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“The combination of sorting and sodium bisulphite lowered the levels to 72.9%”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
e3“decontaminate aflatoxin”
Claim · model-written summary
Citric acid combined with dehulling was 55.3% effective in reducing aflatoxin.
- Treatment
- citric acid and dehullinge1
- Outcome
- aflatoxine3
- Value
- 55.3%e1
- Comparator
- control with no treatment appliede2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“citric acid and dehulling were 55.3% effective”
e2“compared to the control with no treatment applied”
e3“decontaminate aflatoxin”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend that farmers adopt effective aflatoxin reduction methods so maize can be used as food and feed instead of being discarded.
- Outcome
- effective methods should be adopted by farmerse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize grains”
e1“effective methods should be adopted by farmers to put maize to good use for human food and livestock feed”
The same questions in other papers
citric acid · disease · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
ammonia · disease · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
application · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
59 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
69 papers more in this group
See all 73 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.