(Dr. Guo Jiyuan, General Manager of the Quality Control Department of New Hope Liuhe)I. Judgment criteria for the degree of contamination of common mycotoxins2. There are standards, and then The samples of New Hope Liuhe and the finished products of feed companies on the market were analyzed (this quarter and the same quarter of 2014). The mycotoxins were compared (the raw material samples corn and wheat were from Henan, Shandong, Hebei, Northeast, etc.). The main production area, the source of samples is from each branch of Liuhe, a total of 1500 samples, the finished feed is from the feed products on the market)The raw material analysis is as follows1. Corn: In the first quarter of 2015, corn vomiting toxin pollution reached 27%, 10% more than 16% in the same period in 2014, but AFB1 and F-2 toxins were reduced compared with 2014; (In 2018, most feed companies auctioned and used 2015 corn, Vomiting toxin is severely exceeded, be cautious)2. Wheat: The toxin pollution of wheat in the first quarter of 2015 is as serious as 2014.3. Cotton meal: more lighter than the first quarter of 2014 ;4. Corn germ meal: DON pollution is relatively serious, especially F-2 and AFB1 are seriously polluted, and the control of raw materials is more difficult. (Currently, there are many fake corn germ meal on the market, mostly corn The pulp is sprayed on the corn husks, and the corn husks are sprayed. The toxins in the corn husks are very serious. In addition, corn syrup also has polluted toxins, so it is recommended not to use germ meal in pig feed) 5. Domestic DDGS: Compared with the first quarter of 2014, the pollution of DON has increased, with a serious pollution rate of 70%, and the difficulty of controlling raw materials.6. Imported DDGS: The pollution of DON has increased, with the highest content of 25.5ppm, which is serious The pollution rate has reached 64%, and the control of raw materials has become more difficult; (In the past, DON was basically not detected in imported DDGS, and now the whole bo Buy Phenibut Online x is basically tested, and the testing is increased)7. Bran: DON Affected by wheat, severe pollution reached 29%, the same as in 2014;8. Corn gluten meal: pollution intensified compared with the first quarter of 2014, reaching 33%Summary: p>A. Corn vomiting toxin pollution increased in the first quarter, with a serious pollution rate of 27%B. The pollution of AFB1 in peanut meal is still severe, with a severity of 83%C, rapeseed meal, cotton meal aflatoxin pollution is reducedD, domestic DDGS and imported DDGS vomiting toxin pollution is more serious than in previous yearsE, corn germ meal is affected by F- 2 The pollution is serious, and the serious pollution rate reaches 100%.Next is the investigation of mycotoxins in the finished feed products on the market1. Pig feed: Compared with 2014, the pig feed is affected by F -2. DON pollution has increased. F-2 has a serious pollution rate of 26%, and DON has a serious pollution rate of 38%. It is urgent to strengthen the control of raw materials 2. Dairy cattle feed: In the first quarter of 2015, the mycotoxin pollution rate was generally higher than that in 2014, which should arouse great attention from relevant technical personnel of feed manufacturersSummary of raw materials and finished products:A. Corn and corn by-products vomiting toxin pollution increasedB. Corn germ meal F-2 pollution is quite seriousC, finished product samples vomiting toxin pollution increased compared with 2014, should cause Highly concernedD. In the first quarter of 2015, the pollution of vomiting toxins in raw materials has generally increased compared with 2014. The control of raw material quality mycotoxins has become more difficult, and the procurement has become more difficult;E, Appropriate technical measures (addition of mycotoxin adsorbents, corn peeling, water-washed raw materials, use of high-quality raw materials) should be taken to reduce risks;F. Increase the monito Phenibut Suppliers ring of mycotoxins, and purchase more efforts in source selection ;2. Mainly talk about the evaluation method of mycotoxin adsorbent1. There is no such item as “mycotoxin adsorbent” in the three catalogs of the Ministry of Agriculture, and there is no such raw material officially. Standards and evaluation methods. 2. For the evaluation method of “mycotoxin adsorbent”, enterprises generally adopt the method of adding standard products directly, and each enterprise has good data.3. Mycotoxin adsorption The choice of agent: the evaluation method is very important, method + data effect, the method clearly shows how the toxin is transferred; this is very important; three, common evaluation methods 1: Standard product is added to the direct extraction methodAdvantages: easy to operateDisadvantages: out of the actual situation, the adsorption effect is amplified, the data is unreliable2 Blank matrix +Standard methodAdvantages: increased interference factorsDisadvantages: the toxin is still in a free state, the adsorption effect is amplified, and the data is still unreliable3, Evaluation method of Liuhe: Biomimetic adsorption and separation evaluation methodAdvantages: close to the real environment, clarifying the process of toxin transferDisadvantages: difficult separation method, recovery rate 75%, small application range (Applicable to products with minerals as carriers)It was found that the substances formed by the separated adsorbent and mycotoxins can not be detected by conventional extraction and must be processed for detection; p>Summary:A. The role of the mycotoxin adsorbent: The overall evaluation has a certain effect, but it is impossible to turn the severely mildewed raw material into a high-quality raw material. The effect on some of these toxins is possible, but it is very difficult to comprehensively take into account the technology;B. Evaluation method of mycotoxin adsorbent: The method of the sports Phenibut Suppliers committee determines the quality of the data, and there is no recognized in vitro Methods; lack of standards; in vivo and in vitro binding is the research direction;C. Evaluation of mycotoxin adsorbents: it is difficult work and technically difficult. There are too many influencing factors based on the evaluation of breeding effect alone, and the result is subjective orientation problem. Let me add a few words (author):The mycotoxin adsorbent only adsorbs part of the toxins, and a large amount of mycotoxins are still eaten and absorbed. However, by adding bile acids to the feed, analyzing the antioxidant enzyme activity in the serum, the content of malondialdehyde and the analysis of tissue sections, as well as the performance of production performance, we fully proved that bile acids have the ability to protect the animal body from the damage of mycotoxins. Powerful effect. Bile acid anti-inflammatory response and antioxidant mechanism: mycotoxins DON and FB can cause pro-inflammatory cytokines (such as IL-1β, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL- 6 and TNFα) secretion. These inflammatory cytokines can have local and systemic effects, including inflammation, fever and reduced food intake. In 2014, the Institute of Feed of the Chinese Academy of Sciences conducted a study on the effectiveness of bile acids on largemouth bass. With the increase in the level of bile acid addition, the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines IL-1β and TNFα decreased significantly, and the anti-inflammatory cytokine II-11β And TGFβ, TGFβ1, TGFβ2 secretion levels are significantly increased. Deoxycholic acid, one of the components of bile acid, has a direct effect on endotoxin lipopolysaccharide in vitro, decomposing endotoxin into non-toxic subunits or forming micro-polymers, preventing toxins and harmful substances. Absorption;Bile acids in the body can destroy or combine with bacterial toxins and mycotoxins in the gastrointestinal tract to form a complex that is not easily absorbed, inhibiting bacterial translocation and absorption of endotoxins and mycotoxins. The article is the original article of Shandong Longchang Animal Health Products Co., Ltd. Please indicate the source for reprinting. Thanks