Comparison of major biocontrol strains of non-aflatoxigenic Aspergillus flavus for the reduction of aflatoxins and cyclopiazonic acid in maize

Abstract

Biological control of toxigenic Aspergillus flavus in maize through competitive displacement by non-aflatoxigenic strains was evaluated in a series of field studies. Four sets of experiments were conducted between 2007 and 2009 to assess the competitiveness of non-aflatoxigenic strains when challenged against toxigenic strains using a pin-bar inoculation technique. In three sets of experiments the non-aflatoxigenic strain K49 effectively displaced toxigenic strains at various concentrations or combinations. The fourth study compared the relative competitiveness of three non-aflatoxigenic strains (K49, NRRL 21882 from Afla-Guard®, and AF36) when challenged on maize against two aflatoxin- and cyclopiazonic acid (CPA)-producing strains (K54 and F3W4). These studies indicate that K49 and NRRL 21882 are superior to AF36 in reducing total aflatoxin contamination. Neither K49 nor NRRL 21882 produce CPA and when challenged with K54 and F3W4, CPA and aflatoxins were reduced by 84–97% and 83–98%, respectively. In contrast, AF36 reduced aflatoxins by 20% with F3W4 and 93% with K54 and showed no reduction in CPA with F3W4 and only a 62% reduction in CPA with K54. Because AF36 produces CPA, high levels of CPA accumulate when maize is inoculated with AF36 alone or in combination with F3W4 or K54. These results indicate that K49 may be equally effective as NRRL 21882 in reducing both aflatoxins and CPA in maize.

Keywords:

• mycology
• microbiology
• risk assessment
• aflatoxins
• mycotoxins
• fungi
• cereals

Acknowledgements

The authors appreciate the technical assistance of Mr Owen Houston for establishing field tests. The authors thank Dr John Richard for providing background information on CPA. This research was funded by ARS Project #6402-42000-003-00D. The mention of trade names or commercial products is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the US Department of Agriculture.