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

INTRODUCTIONantagonism was noted in the ability of DON to inhibit the delayed hypersensitivity response inpresence of ZEA (Pestka et al., 1987). However, the resistance to Listeria monocytogenes wasreduced in an additive manner by co-administration of DON and ZEA (Pestka et al., 1987) (Table 5).Interestingly, DON+ZEA combination was assessed on growth of brewing yeast, considering thatgrains contaminated with mycotoxins are used for beer production, and may be introduced atdifferent steps of the brewing process (Boeira et al., 2000). Despite the effect caused by combinationof DON and ZEA at high concentrations, shown to pass from antagonism to synergism depending onthe ratio of toxins in the mixture, when low concentrations were used, inhibition of yeast growth wasnot observed.3.2) Interaction between DON and MONDue to the relatively tolerance of DON in poultry, its interaction with MON reflected mostly theMON effects (Harvey et al., 1997; Morris et al., 1999). Poults fed diets containing MON alone and theDON-MON combination exhibited an increased incidence of variable sized cardiomyocyte nuclei, withnumerous large, giant nuclei and a generalized loss of cardiomyocyte cross striations (Morris et al.,1999). Isolated renal tubules in sections of kidney were noted to have diffuse mineralization inanimals fed MON and DON-MON (Harvey et al., 1997; Morris et al., 1999), and also extensive tubularepithelial degeneration (Harvey et al., 1997). But Harvey et al. (1997) indicated a moderation of theseverity of lesions in the tissues of chicks fed DON-MON, suggesting an antagonistic effect.40