Effet chez le porcelet d'une exposition à un régime co-contaminé en ...

INTRODUCTIONwhereas in the experiment of Kubena et al. (1997a), the effect on these enzymes was lesser than FBalone. No histological analysis on liver was done to find out a possible link, but a partial explanationcould also be due to the greater reduction in feed intake in the combination group (Kubena et al.,1997a). Another reason may be the type of birds used and the sex, sensitivity being differentbetween male and female.However, the likelihood of encountering concentrations of 300 mg FB/kg in finished feed is verysmall.One study investigated the interaction of DAS with a very high content of FB in diets (Kubena etal., 1997b), and reported additive effect on performance and antagonistic effect for oral lesions(Table 5). Hematological and biochemical values showed different types of interaction, fromsynergism to antagonism.1.2.2) with TCT type BThree experiments, performed in pigs and in chickens, investigated the combined effect of DONand FB, the most frequently detected fusariotoxins (Grenier et al., 2011; Harvey et al., 1996; Kubenaet al., 1997a) (Table 5).The type of interaction on body weight gain differed depending on the experiment. A synergisticinteraction was reported by Harvey, no change in this parameter whatever the toxins included in thediet was observed by Grenier. In chicken, Kubena et al. (1997a) observed a less than additive effect,mainly due to FB in the combination group. Interestingly, in this latter study, the feed intake wasslightly increased in comparison to the other treatments (Table 5).An antagonisitic interaction has been observed for albumin. DON in the multi-contaminated dietseems to potentiate the FB effects, such as reflected by the hepatic enzymes concentrations (Harveyet al., 1996; Kubena et al., 1997a). It could be linked to the unexpected effect on the RW-L in theexperiment conducted by Harvey et al. (1996), where the combination led to an opposite effectcompared to individual effects (Table 5). The large and synergistic decrease in the RW-L may be dueto an important hepatic damage, as already mentioned in this review for AF-FB interaction. However,histologically in this experiment, hepatic lesions observed (necrosis) in animals fed the combinedmycotoxins, were not more severe than those observed in animals fed the FB diet. By contrast,Grenier et al. (2011) showed a greater effect in the severity and extent of lesions (mainlyhepatocytes vacuolization and megalocytosis) (Table 5), suggesting that DON, known to alter theintestinal permeability, had enhanced the intestinal absorption of FB, well known to be poorlyabsorbed. The differences in these two studies are most likely due to the different concentrations of37