Biological control of aflatoxins in Africa: current status and potential challenges in the face of climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aflatoxin contamination of crops is frequent in warm regions across the globe, including large areas in sub-Saharan Africa. Crop contamination with these dangerous toxins transcends health, food security, and trade sectors. It cuts across the value chain, affecting farmers, traders, markets, and finally consumers. Diverse fungi within Aspergillus section Flavi contaminate crops with aflatoxins. Within these Aspergillus communities, several genotypes are not capable of producing aflatoxins (atoxigenic). Carefully selected atoxigenic genotypes in biological control (biocontrol) formulations efficiently reduce aflatoxin contamination of crops when applied prior to flowering in the field. This safe and environmentally friendly, effective technology was pioneered in the US, where well over a million acres of susceptible crops are treated annually. The technology has been improved for use in sub-Saharan Africa, where efforts are under way to develop biocontrol products, under the trade name Aflasafe, for 11 African nations. The number of participating nations is expected to increase. In parallel, state of the art technology has been developed for large-scale inexpensive manufacture of Aflasafe products under the conditions present in many African nations. Results to date indicate that all Aflasafe products, registered and under experimental use, reduce aflatoxin concentrations in treated crops by >80% in comparison to untreated crops in both field and storage conditions. Benefits of aflatoxin biocontrol technologies are discussed along with potential challenges, including climate change, likely to be faced during the scaling-up of Aflasafe products. Lastly, we respond to several apprehensions expressed in the literature about the use of atoxigenic genotypes in biocontrol formulations. These responses relate to the following apprehensions: sorghum as carrier, distribution costs, aflatoxin-conscious markets, efficacy during drought, post-harvest benefits, risk of allergies and/or aspergillosis, influence of Aflasafe on other mycotoxins and on soil microenvironment, dynamics of Aspergillus genotypes, and recombination between atoxigenic and toxigenic genotypes in natural conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".