Effet chez le porcelet d'une exposition à un régime co-contaminé en ...
Effet chez le porcelet d'une exposition à un régime co-contaminé en ...
Effet chez le porcelet d'une exposition à un régime co-contaminé en ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
INTRODUCTIONbetwe<strong>en</strong> AF and CPA on the body weight of animals was qualified as synergistic or additive (Pier etal., 1989; Smith et al., 1992).Biochemical and hematological alterations were also measured, and <strong>le</strong>ss than additive toantagonistic interaction betwe<strong>en</strong> AF and CPA were reported (Kumar and Balachandran, 2005;Morrissey et al., 1987; Smith et al., 1992) (Tab<strong>le</strong> 4). Similar types of interaction were noted onimm<strong>un</strong>e parameters, with especially an antagonism action of CPA on the depressant effect of AF oncell-mediated imm<strong>un</strong>ity (Pier et al., 1989) (Tab<strong>le</strong> 4). However, the author suggested that the reducednumbers of animals in the <strong>co</strong>mbination group, and that survivors had appar<strong>en</strong>tly greater resistanceto the toxins may have influ<strong>en</strong>ced the data obtained.Among these studies, a particular att<strong>en</strong>tion has be<strong>en</strong> paid on micros<strong>co</strong>pic <strong>le</strong>sions. Wh<strong>en</strong> rats wereshortly exposed to the my<strong>co</strong>toxins, <strong>le</strong>ss than additive or antagonistic interaction betwe<strong>en</strong> the twotoxins were described for the incid<strong>en</strong>ce in liver <strong>le</strong>sions (Morrissey et al., 1987) (Tab<strong>le</strong> 4). Conversely,wh<strong>en</strong> animals were exposed for a longer period to these toxins, the interaction was suggested to beadditive in liver <strong>le</strong>sions, characterized by a marked cytoplasmic vacuolation (Kumar andBalachandran, 2009; Pier et al., 1989). Likewise, this greater effect was noticed in the severity andincid<strong>en</strong>ce of kidney <strong>le</strong>sions in broi<strong>le</strong>r chick<strong>en</strong>s (Kumar and Balachandran, 2009), and in<strong>co</strong>nsist<strong>en</strong>tly inrats, dep<strong>en</strong>ding on the ratio of my<strong>co</strong>toxins used (Morrissey et al., 1987) (Tab<strong>le</strong> 4). Of note, <strong>le</strong>sionsre<strong>co</strong>rded in gizzard, crop and prov<strong>en</strong>triculus suggested adverse effects on the digestive tract; theinteraction <strong>le</strong>ading either to additive (Kumar and Balachandran, 2009) or <strong>le</strong>ss than additive effects(Smith et al., 1992).4.2) Interaction betwe<strong>en</strong> Aflatoxins (AF) and - Moniliformin (MON), - Sterigmatocystin (STER), -Citrinin (CIT), - Rubratoxin (RUB)In order to a give <strong>co</strong>mp<strong>le</strong>te picture of the published literature, we should m<strong>en</strong>tion that one studyhave investigated the <strong>co</strong>mbined effect of AF and moniliformin on chick<strong>en</strong> (Kub<strong>en</strong>a et al., 1997c),another one the <strong>co</strong>mbined effect of AF and sterigmatocystin on guinea pig (Richard et al., 1978), anda third one the <strong>co</strong>mbined effect of aflatoxin and citrinin on chick<strong>en</strong> (Ahamad et al., 2006). The<strong>co</strong>mbined effect of AF and rubratoxin has also be<strong>en</strong> investigated (Hayes et al., 1977; Thurston et al.,1989; Wyatt et al., 1973). The parameters measured and the type of interaction observed betwe<strong>en</strong>AF and MON, STER, CIT and RUB are summarized in Tab<strong>le</strong> 4.34