Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 309

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scientific Opinion on the risks to human and animal health related to the presence of beauvericin and enniatins in food and feed

Open access
EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM)·2014·EFSA Journal

Abstract

Beauvericin and enniatins are mycotoxins produced by various Fusarium species. The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific opinion on the risk to human and animal health related to the presence of beauvericin and enniatins in food and feed. A total of 12 685 analytical results for beauvericin and enniatins in food, feed and unprocessed grains were evaluated. For the assessment of enniatins, the sum of enniatins A, A1, B and B1 were considered. The most important contributors to the chronic dietary exposure to beauvericin and the sum of enniatins were ‘Grains and grain-based products’, especially ‘Bread and rolls’, ‘Fine bakery wares’ and ‘Pasta (raw)’. Given the lack of relevant toxicity data, a risk assessment was not possible. To obtain some insights in the possible risks of both mycotoxins at the estimated acute dietary exposure levels, these were compared to the LD 50 values of beauvericin and of the drug fusafungine (a mixture of enniatins). For the chronic exposure, an estimate for the LOAEL of fusafungine was considered. The CONTAM Panel concluded that acute exposure to beauvericin and enniatins do not indicate concern for human health. There might be a concern with respect to chronic exposure but no firm conclusion could be drawn, thus relevant in vivo toxicity data are needed to perform a human risk assessment. Animal exposure to beauvericin and enniatins was primarily from consuming cereal grains and cereal by-products. Using the LD 50 values of beauvericin and fusafungine, adverse health effects from the acute exposure to beauvericin and the sum of enniatins for farm and companion animals were unlikely. The chronic exposure for poultry indicated that adverse health effects from beauvericin and enniatins were unlikely. For other considered animals, the lack of LOAELs/NOAELs precluded the estimation of chronic health risk from beauvericin and enniatins.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3802

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 309

Metadata

Authors
(CONTAM), E. P. O. C. I. T. F. C.
Venue
EFSA Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-08
Volume
12
Issue
8
ISSN
1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4211104456
Cited by
309
References
1
FWCI
18.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scientific Opinion on the risks to human and animal health related to the presence of beauvericin and enniatins in food and feed. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3802
The paper
(CONTAM), E. P. O. C. I. T. F. C. (2014). Scientific Opinion on the risks to human and animal health related to the presence of beauvericin and enniatins in food and feed. EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3802

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.