Cited by 52Mycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodProbiotics and Fermented FoodsAnimal Nutrition and Physiology

Probiotic microorganisms detoxify ochratoxin A in both a chicken liver cell line and chickens

Markowiak, Paulina, Śliżewska, Katarzyna, Nowak, Adriana, Chlebicz, Agnieszka, Żbikowski, Artur, Pawłowski, Karol, Szeleszczuk, Piotr·2019·Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The administration of probiotics and prebiotics (synbiotics) is a promising method for detoxification of ochratoxin A (OTA) in animals. The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of five probiotic strains of lactic acid bacteria (LAB) and one Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast strain, from three different synbiotics for poultry, to detoxify OTA. In addition, we also investigated the genotoxicity of faecal water (FW) of chickens after administering OTA and/or synbiotics for 42 days. RESULTS: All tested LAB and yeast strains had the ability to detoxify OTA by significant (P < 0.05) reducing its concentration (by 31.3-47.7% and 31.9%, respectively, after 24 h incubation) and genotoxicity (by 22.6-51.8% and 52.7%, respectively). Synbiotics composed of four and five probiotic strains significantly (P < 0.05) decreased FW genotoxicity of chicks, after exposure to OTA, to the level seen in the control group (21.8% ± 1.7%) and were more effective than synbiotics composed of three probiotic strains (31.5%). CONCLUSION: These results showed that there was a beneficial effect of the synbiotics on the gastrointestinal tract of animals. Furthermore, synbiotic preparations containing four or five of tested strains can be considered as preventive agents in the contamination of poultry with OTA. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jsfa.9664

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 41 · Cited by 52

Authors
Markowiak, P., Śliżewska, K., Nowak, A., Chlebicz, A., Żbikowski, A., Pawłowski, K., & Szeleszczuk, P.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Fermentation Technology and Microbiology, Faculty of Biotechnology and Food Sciences Lodz University of Technology Lodz Poland
  • Lodz University of Technology (PL)
  • Warsaw University of Life Sciences (PL)
Corresponding author
Śliżewska, Katarzyna
Venue
Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-04
Volume
99
Issue
9
Pages
4309-4318
ISSN
  • 0022-5142 (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0010
OpenAlex
W2919686358
Cited by
52
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
FWCI
4.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Narodowe Centrum Badań i Rozwoju (PBS3/A8/32/2015)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Mycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Animal Science and Zoology › Animal Nutrition and Physiology
Keywords
ochratoxin A, probiotics, synbiotics, lactic acid bacteria, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, mycotoxin detoxification, genotoxicity, fecal water, poultry
MeSH terms
Animals, Animal Feed, Cell Line, Chickens, Liver, Ochratoxins, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Probiotics, Gastrointestinal Tract, Lactobacillales, Prebiotics, Synbiotics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review