European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 224, Issue 3, pp 301–308 | Cite as

Retention of ochratoxin A and fumonisin B1 and B2 from beer on solid surfaces: comparison of efficiency of adsorbents with different origin

  • Elena BelajováEmail author
  • Drahomíra Rauová
  • Lubomír Daško
Original Paper


Fifteen solid materials with variable origin and various adsorption properties for retention of mycotoxins were tested—mineral materials, organic polymers and chemical modified silica gels that are used in widespread separation techniques. Some filtration materials currently utilized in brewing technology for beer clarifying and filtration were also examined. Adsorbents have been investigated in model and real samples (beer) and evaluated on the basis of adsorption capacity for ochratoxin A and fumonisin B1 and B2. Mentioned mycotoxins are commonly present in beers and may increase the risk on human health in high beer-consuming countries. The ability of adsorbent to retain mycotoxins on its surface was evaluated as micrograms of mycotoxin per one gram of adsorbent or as percentage of mycotoxin adsorbed. The experiments were accomplished in dynamic mode, which is mostly applied in beer production. The quality profile of beer after treatment with adsorbents in connection with high efficiency of mycotoxins’ removal was also considered. The main beer qualitative attributes such as pH value, color, iso-alpha acids were defined. As perspective adsorbents has shown to be carbon and modified silica gels. The retention of ochratoxin A on carbon was 90–96% in range of carbon dosages 2.5–6.5 g/l, and its retention on modified silica gels alters in scope of 64–94%. The retentive effect of fumonisin B1 and B2 on modified silica gels reached 74–100% in dependence on adsorbent dosage. Most changes underwent iso-alpha acids likely in consequence of retention on adsorbents together with mycotoxins. To achieve the scheduled goals the sensitive HPLC methods with fluorescence detection were used.


Ochratoxin A Fumonisins Adsorbent Adsorption capacity Beer HPLC 



This study was a part of national research project of the state program PP3 “Food—quality and safety” for years 2003–2005, financed by the Ministry of Agriculture of Slovak Republic.


  1. 1.
    Melotte L Press Report of the Analysis Committee of the European Brewery Convention, 14 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hardwick WA (1995) Handbook of brewing. Marcel Dekker, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Schwarz PB, Casper HH, Beattle S (1995) J Am Soc Brew Chem 53:121–127Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scott PM, Kanhere SR, Lawrence GA, Daley EF, Farber JM (1995) Food Addit Contam 12:31–40Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baxter ED, Slaiding IR, Kelly B (2001) J Am Soc Brew Chem 59:98–100Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gumus T, Arici M, Demirci M (2004) J Inst Brew 110:146–148Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Anon. (2000) Malting technology. Manual of good practice. European Brewery Convention, Fachverlag Hans CarlGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Odhav B, Naicker V (2002) Food Addit Contam 19:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anon. (2001) Safety evaluation of certain mycotoxins in food. WHO Food Additives Series: 47. World Health Organisation, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Scott PM, Lawrence GA (1995) J Food Prot 58:1379–1382Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Anon. (2001) Safety evaluation of certain mycotoxins in food. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 74, FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Commission Regulation (EC) No. 856/2005 of 6 June 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No. 466/2001 as regards Fusarium toxins. Off J Eur Union, L143/3–L143/8Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Commission Regulation (EC) No. 123/2005 of 26 January 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No. 466/2001 as regards ochratoxin A. Off J Eur Union, L25/3–L25/5Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sulpizio TE (1999) Advances in filter aid and precoat filtration technology. Annual Technical Conference, Boston, MA, April 6–9Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Christoferson GO (2003) MBAA TQ 40:290–292Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Daško L, Rauová D, Belajová E, Kováč M (2005) Czech J Food Sci 23:20–26Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Daško L, Belajová E, Rauová D, Kováč M (2005) Czech J Food Sci 23:69–73Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Basařová C, Čepička J, Dolealová A, Kahler M, Kubíček J, Poledníková M, Voborský J (1992) Pivovarsko-sladařská analytika 1, 2, 3. Merkanta s.r.o., PrahaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Huwig A, Fremund S, Kapeli O, Dutler H (2001) Toxicol Lett 122:179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Castellari M, Versari A, Fabiani A, Parpinello GP, Galassi S (2001) J Agric Food Chem 49:3917–3921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Solfrizzo M, Carratu MR, Avantaggiato G, Galvano F, Pietri A, Visconti A (2001) Food Chem Toxicol 39:507–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Product Data Sheet (2003) PDS 0556 A—October 03–I/4. Rohm and Haas CompanyGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zief M, Kiser R (1988) Solid phase extraction for sample preparation. J. T. Baker Inc., Phillipsburg, NJ, USAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elena Belajová
    • 1
    Email author
  • Drahomíra Rauová
    • 1
  • Lubomír Daško
    • 1
  1. 1.Food Research InstituteBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations