dgkh000650
10.3205/dgkh000650
urn:nbn:de:0183-dgkh0006509
Research Article
Synergistic detoxification of aflatoxin B1 using paraprobiotics and phytochemical extracts: quantitative analysis and mechanistic insights
Synergistische Entgiftung von Aflatoxin B1 mittels paraprobiotischer Präparate und phytochemischer Extrakte: quantitative Analyse und mechanistische Einblicke
Haji Kandi
Haji Kandi
Omid
O
Department of Biology, CT.C, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
author
Mahdi Hamdi
Mahdi Hamdi
Seyed Mohammad
SM
Associate Professor
Department of Biology, CT.C, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran, Phone: +98 912 738 5316Department of Biology, CT.C, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
smm.hamdi@iau.ac.ir
author
Bayat
Bayat
Mansour
M
Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, SR.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
author
Tajabadi Ebrahimi
Tajabadi Ebrahimi
Maryam
M
Department of Biology, CT.C, Islamic Azad University Tehran, Iran
author
German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
Düsseldorf
610
aflatoxin B1
paraprobiotics
Lactobacillus brevis
Lactobacillus paracasei
Punica granatum
Asparagus khorasanensis
HPLC
detoxification
synergy
Aflatoxin B1
Paraprobiotika
Lactobacillus brevis
Lactobacillus paracasei
Punica granatum
Asparagus khorasanensis
HPLC
Entgiftung
Synergie
20260602
engl
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open-Access-Artikel und steht unter den Lizenzbedingungen der Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (Namensnennung).
2196-5226
21
GMS Hygiene and Infection Control
GMS Hyg Infect Control
41
Hintergrund: Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), ein potentes Karzinogen der Gruppe I, das von Aspergillus-Arten produziert wird, stellt eine erhebliche Herausforderung für die Lebensmittelsicherheit dar. Diese Studie evaluiert die synergistische Wirksamkeit von hitzeinaktiviertem Lactobacillus brevis und L. paracasei (Paraprobiotika) in Kombination mit ethanolischen Extrakten von Punica granatum und Asparagus khorasanensis zur Entgiftung von AFB1 und erweitert damit frühere Erkenntnisse über ihre anti-aflatoxigenen Eigenschaften via Modulation der Genexpression.Methode: AFB1 wurde mittels Aspergillus flavus PTCC 5006 hergestellt. Paraprobiotika wurden durch thermische Inaktivierung präpariert; die Zellwandintegrität wurde mittels Rasterelektronenmikroskopie (REM) und Fourier-Transformations-Infrarotspektroskopie (FTIR) untersucht. Phytochemikalien wurden mittels Hochleistungsflüssigkeitschromatographie mit Diodenarray-Detektion (HPLC-DAD) charakterisiert. Die AFB1-Konzentrationen wurden mittels HPLC mit Fluoreszenzdetektion quantifiziert (Nachweisgrenze [LOD]: 0,25 µg/mL; Bestimmungsgrenze [LOQ]: 0,75 µg/mL). Dosis-Wirkungs-Beziehungen und Synergismus wurden unter Verwendung des Kombinationsindex (CI) nach Chou-Talalay evaluiert.Ergebnisse: Paraprobiotika reduzierten AFB1 um 47,2% (95%-KI: 44,8–49,6%, Cohen’s d=1,8) bei 108 KBE/mL und übertrafen damit lebende Probiotika (30,6%, p<0,001). Die binäre Extraktmischung (je 250 µg/mL) erzielte eine Reduktion um 43,7% (95%-KI: 40,5–46,9%, CI=0,78). Die Kombinationsbehandlung führte zu einer Reduktion um 85,8% (95%-KI: 82,3–89,3%, CI=0,65, p<0,001), was auf einen starken Synergismus hinweist. Dieser korrelierte mit der Herunterregulation der Aflatoxin-Biosynthesegene (aflD, aflT, aflR, aflM).Schlussfolgerung: Die Paraprobiotika-Phytochemikalien-Kombination bietet einen dual-mechanistischen Ansatz zur AFB1-Entgiftung, der physikalische Sequestrierung und transkriptionelle Suppression integriert. Diese Strategie zeigt vielversprechendes Potenzial für Anwendungen in der Lebensmittelsicherheit und erfordert weitere Studien in vivo und in Lebensmittelmatrices.
Background: Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), a potent group I carcinogen produced by Aspergillus species, poses a significant food safety challenge. This study evaluates the synergistic efficacy of heat-inactivated Lactobacillus (L.) brevis and L. paracasei (paraprobiotics) combined with ethanolic extracts of Punica (P.) granatum and Asparagus (A.) khorasanensis for AFB1 detoxification, extending prior findings on their anti-aflatoxigenic properties via gene expression modulation. Methods: AFB1 was produced using Aspergillus flavus PTCC 5006. Paraprobiotics were prepared by thermal inactivation, with cell wall integrity assessed via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Phytochemicals were characterized using high-performance liquid chromatography with diode-array detection (HPLC-DAD). AFB1 levels were quantified via HPLC with fluorescence detection (limit of detection [LOD]: 0.25 µg/mL; limit of quantification [LOQ]: 0.75 µg/mL). Dose-response relationships and synergy were evaluated using the Chou-Talalay combination index (CI).Results: Paraprobiotics reduced AFB1 by 47.2% (95% CI: 44.8–49.6%, Cohen’s d=1.8) at 108 CFU/mL, outperforming viable probiotics (30.6%, p<0.001). The binary extract mixture (250 µg/mL each) achieved a 43.7% reduction (95% CI: 40.5–46.9%, CI=0.78). The combined treatment yielded an 85.8% reduction (95% CI: 82.3–89.3%, CI=0.65, p<0.001), indicating strong synergy, correlated with downregulated aflatoxin biosynthesis genes (aflD, aflT, aflR, aflM). Conclusion: The paraprobiotic-phytochemical combination offers a dual-mechanism approach for AFB1 detoxification, integrating physical sequestration and transcriptional suppression. This strategy holds promise for food safety applications, warranting further in vivo and food matrix studies.
IntroductionAflatoxin B1 (AFB1), a mycotoxin produced by Aspergillus (A.) flavus and A. parasiticus, is classified as a group I carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with established links to hepatocellular carcinoma, particularly in regions with high contamination and hepatitis B prevalence , . Contaminating approximately 25% of global agricultural commodities, including cereals, nuts, and dairy products, AFB1 poses a significant threat to food safety and public health , . Conventional detoxification methods, such as physical removal or chemical treatments, are limited by cost, efficacy, or secondary contamination risks , . Biological approaches using lactic acid bacteria (LAB) have demonstrated potential for aflatoxin binding , with heat-inactivated probiotics (paraprobiotics) showing enhanced binding capacity due to structural cell wall modifications . Concurrently, phytochemicals from (P.) granatum (rich in ellagitannins, e.g., punicalagins) and Asparagus khorasanensis (containing steroidal saponins) suppress aflatoxin biosynthesis by downregulating key genes (aflD, aflT, aflR, aflM) , , . Despite individual advances in microbial and phytochemical strategies, their synergistic potential remains underexplored. This study aims to:quantify the individual and combined efficac<![CDATA[y of p</PlainText></TextGroup>araprobiotics and phytochemical extracts in AFB1 detoxification; </ListItem><ListItem level="1" levelPosition="2" numString="2.">characterize structural changes in paraprobiotics enhancing binding capacity; </ListItem><ListItem level="1" levelPosition="3" numString="3.">establish dose-response relationships; and </ListItem><ListItem level="1" levelPosition="4" numString="4.">correlate AFB1 reduction with prior gene expression findings to propose a comprehensive mechanistic model. </ListItem></OrderedList></Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Materials and methods" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Materials and methods</MainHeadline><SubHeadline>Aflatoxin production and standardization</SubHeadline><Pgraph><Mark2>A. flavus</Mark2> PTCC 5006 (Persian Type Culture Collection, Tehran, Iran) was cultured on yeast extract sucrose (YES) medium (20 g/L yeast extract, 150 g/L sucrose, pH 6.5) at 28°C for 7 days under dark conditions. AFB1 was extracted using chloroform, purified via silica gel column chromatography, and characterized by HPLC and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Stock solutions (1,000 µg/mL in methanol) were diluted in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4) to 50 µg/mL for experiments. All procedures were conducted in a biosafety level 2 laboratory with strict safety protocols, including fume hoods and personal protective equipment. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Paraprobiotic preparation</SubHeadline><Pgraph><Mark2>Lactobacillus brevis</Mark2> (DSM 20082) and <Mark2>L. paracasei</Mark2> (DSM 20203), obtained from the Leibniz Institute DSMZ (Braunschweig, Germany), were cultured in de Man, Rogosa, and Sharpe (MRS) broth at 37°C for 24 hours. Cell density was adjusted to 10<Superscript>8</Superscript> colony forming units (CFU)/mL in PBS, verified by plate counting on MRS agar. Paraprobiotics were prepared by thermal inactivation at 95°C for 60 minutes, followed by rapid cooling to 4°C. Inactivation was confirmed by the absence of growth on MRS agar after 72 hours. Cell wall integrity was assessed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM; samples fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde, dehydrated, and gold-coated) and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR; 4,000–400 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript>, 4 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript> resolution).</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Phytochemical extraction and characterization</SubHeadline><Pgraph><Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> (TARI 88839) and <Mark2>Asparagus khorasanensis</Mark2> (TARI 35895) were collected from Golestan and Khorasan Provinces, Iran, respectively, and authenticated by the Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands, Tehran, Iran. Ethanolic extracts were prepared by macerating 3<TextGroup><PlainText>0 g</PlainText></TextGroup> of powdered plant material in 250 mL 96% ethanol (1:8.<TextGroup><PlainText>3 w</PlainText></TextGroup>/v) for 72 hours with intermittent shaking. Extracts were filtered (Whatman No. 1), concentrated under reduced pressure at 40°C, freeze-dried, and stored at –20°C. Phytochemical profiling was performed using HPLC-DAD (Agilent 1260 Infinity II, C18 column, 4.6×25<TextGroup><PlainText>0 m</PlainText></TextGroup>m, 5 µm) with a mobile phase of 0.1% formic acid in water (A) and acetonitrile (B) (gradient: 0–10 min, 5–15% B; 10–25 min, 15–25% B; 25–35 min, 25–95% B; flow rate: 1.0 mL/min; detection: 280 nm). Major compounds were identified by comparison with reference standards, and minor compounds were analyzed via LC-MS. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Experimental design </SubHeadline><Pgraph>Two experimental phases were conducted. Treatments in phase 1 (screening) included vehicle control (1% v/v DMSO), positive control (50 µg/mL AFB1 in PBS), individual <Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> and <Mark2>A. khorasanensis</Mark2> extracts (125, 250, 500 µg/mL), binary extract mixture (125+125, 250+250, 500+500 µg/mL), viable probiotics (10<Superscript>7</Superscript>, 10<Superscript>8</Superscript>, 1<TextGroup><PlainText>0</PlainText><Superscript>9</Superscript><PlainText> C</PlainText></TextGroup>FU/mL), paraprobiotics (10<Superscript>7</Superscript>, 10<Superscript>8</Superscript>, 10<Superscript>9</Superscript> CFU/mL), and a probiotic-paraprobiotic composite (1:1 ratio).</Pgraph><Pgraph>Treatments in phase 2 (optimization) included vehicle control, positive control, binary extract mixture (25<TextGroup><PlainText>0 µ</PlainText></TextGroup>g/mL each), paraprobiotics (10<Superscript>8</Superscript> CFU/mL), and a tertiary composite (paraprobiotics 10<Superscript>8</Superscript> CFU/mL + <Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> 250 µg/mL + <Mark2>A. khorasanensis</Mark2> 250 µg/mL). Microbial suspensions were centrifuged (8,000×g, 1<TextGroup><PlainText>0 m</PlainText></TextGroup>in), washed twice with PBS, and resuspended in PBS containing 5<TextGroup><PlainText>0 µ</PlainText></TextGroup>g/mL AFB1. Samples were incubated at 37°C for 24 hours with gentle agitation (100 rpm). Supernatants were collected after centrifugation (10,000×g, 1<TextGroup><PlainText>0 m</PlainText></TextGroup>in). Phytochemical treatments were reconstituted in PBS with 1% DMSO and incubated under identical conditions. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>HPLC analysis </SubHeadline><Pgraph>AFB1 was quantified using a Cecil CE 4200 HPLC system with fluorescence detection (excitation: 365 nm; emission: 435 nm) and a reversed-phase C18 column (4.6×25<TextGroup><PlainText>0 m</PlainText></TextGroup>m, 5 µm). The mobile phase was acetonitrile:methanol:water (60:25:15, v/v/v) at 1.2 mL/min. Method validation included: linearity (5–100 µg/mL, R²=0.999), LOD (0.25 µg/mL), LOQ (0.75 µg/mL), intra-day precision (CV=2.1–3.4%), inter-day precision (CV=3.8–4.7%), and recovery (98.3–101.7%). Measurements were performed in triplicate. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Statistical analysis</SubHeadline><Pgraph>Experiments were conducted in triplicate with three independent replicates. Data normality was confirmed using the Shapiro-Wilk test. Differences between groups were analyzed by one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc test. Synergy was assessed using the Chou-Talalay combination index (CI<1 indicates synergy). Effect sizes (Cohen’s d) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05, using GraphPad Prism 9.0. </Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Results" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Results</MainHeadline><SubHeadline>Phytochemical composition HPLC-DAD </SubHeadline><Pgraph>Analysis identified ellagic acid (142.3±8.7 mg/g) and punicalagins (286.5±15.2 mg/g) as major constituents in <Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> extracts, and asparagoside A (87.6±4.3 mg/g) and shatavarin IV (63.2±3.1 mg/g) in <Mark2>A. khorasanensis</Mark2> extracts. LC-MS detected minor flavonoids and phenolics, potentially contributing to bioactivity (Table 1 <ImgLink imgNo="1" imgType="table" />).</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Paraprobiotic characterization</SubHeadline><Pgraph>SEM revealed increased surface roughness and structural alterations in paraprobiotics compared to viable cells (Figure 1 <ImgLink imgNo="1" imgType="figure" />). FTIR spectra showed enhanced peaks at 1,650 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript> (peptidoglycan) and 1,070 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript> (polysaccharides), indicating increased exposure of binding sites (Figure 1 <ImgLink imgNo="1" imgType="figure" />). </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Dose-response relationships </SubHeadline><Pgraph>Paraprobiotics exhibited concentration-dependent AFB1 binding, with a maximum reduction of 47.2±2.3% (95% CI: 44.8–49.6%, Cohen’s d=1.8) at 10<Superscript>8</Superscript> CFU/mL, significantly outperforming viable probiotics (30.6±2.1%, p<0.001) (Figure 2 <ImgLink imgNo="2" imgType="figure" />). Higher concentrations (10<Superscript>9</Superscript> CFU/mL) showed no additional benefit, indicating bindin<TextGroup><PlainText>g site s</PlainText></TextGroup>aturation. The binary extract mixture achieved a 43.7±3.1% reduction (95% CI: 40.5–46.9%, CI=0.78) at 250 µg/mL each, surpassing individual extracts (32.4±2.8%, p<0.05) (Figure 3 <ImgLink imgNo="3" imgType="figure" />, Figure 4 <ImgLink imgNo="4" imgType="figure" />).</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Synergistic effects</SubHeadline><Pgraph>The tertiary composite (paraprobiotics + extracts) reduced AFB1 by 85.8±4.2% (95% CI: 82.3–89.3%, CI=0.65, p<0.001), significantly exceeding the calculated additive effect (68.3±3.7%). This strong synergy was consistent across replicates. </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Gene expression correlation</SubHeadline><Pgraph>AFB1 reduction correlated strongly with prior downregulation of <Mark2>aflR</Mark2> (r=–0.92, p<0.001), supporting a dual mechanism of physical binding by paraprobiotics and transcriptional suppression by phytochemicals. </Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Discussion" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Discussion</MainHeadline><Pgraph>This study establishes a novel paradigm for aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) detoxification by demonstrating unprecedented synergistic efficacy between paraprobiotics and phytochemical extracts. The tertiary composite – combining heat-inactivated <Mark2>L. brevis</Mark2> and <Mark2>L. paracasei</Mark2> with <Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> and <Mark2>Asparagus khorasanensis</Mark2> extracts – achieved 85.8% AFB1 reduction, significantly surpassing conventional monotherapeutic approaches. The Chou-Talalay combination index (CI=0.65) confirms true pharmacological synergy rather than mere additive effects. The superiority of paraprobiotics over viable probiotics (47.2% vs. 30.6% reduction at 10<Superscript>8</Superscript> CFU/mL; p<0.001) is mechanistically explained by heat-induced structural modifications. SEM analyses revealed substantial increases in surface roughness, while FTIR spectra demonstrated enhanced exposure of peptidoglycan (1,650 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript>) and polysaccharide (1,070 cm<Superscript>–1</Superscript>) binding domains. These topological alterations optimize ligand-receptor interactions with AFB1 while eliminating viability-associated limitations like metabolic instability <TextLink reference="12"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="13"></TextLink>. </Pgraph><Pgraph>The binary phytochemical mixture exhibited complementary bioactivity with significant synergy (CI=0.78). Punicalagins from <Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2> disrupt fungal membrane integrity, while steroidal saponins (asparagoside A, shatavarin IV) from <Mark2>Asparagus khorasanensis</Mark2> interfere with aflatoxin biosynthetic enzymes. Crucially, the strong inverse correlation between AFB1 reduction and transcriptional downregulation of <Mark2>aflR</Mark2> (r=-0.92, p<0.001) substantiates that phytochemicals exert epigenetic control ove<TextGroup><PlainText>r a</PlainText></TextGroup>flatoxin biosynthesis <TextLink reference="14"></TextLink>. The master regulator <Mark2>aflR</Mark2> serves as the nexus for this suppression cascade, with concurrent inhibition of structural genes <Mark2>aflD</Mark2> (noranthrone synthase), <Mark2>aflT</Mark2> (transporter), and <Mark2>aflM</Mark2> (versicolorin dehydrogenase) creating a comprehensive transcriptional blockade <TextLink reference="15"></TextLink>. The tertiary composite’s efficacy arises from orthogonal yet synergistic mechanisms: paraprobiotics irreversibly adsorb extracellular AFB1 through enhanced cell wall porosity, while phytochemicals penetrate fungal cells to suppress <Mark2>de novo</Mark2> toxin biosynthesis <TextLink reference="16"></TextLink>. This dual strategy addresses both pre-existing contamination and nascent toxin production – a critical advantage over single-mechanism interventions. </Pgraph><Pgraph>Notably, saturation kinetics observed at higher paraprobiotic concentrations (10<Superscript>9</Superscript> CFU/mL) indicate finite binding site capacity, highlighting the necessity of synergistic combinations to overcome efficacy plateaus. The 85.8% reduction achieved here markedly outperforms existing strategies; activated charcoal achieves ≤60% adsorption but risks nutrient depletion, while individual probiotics or plant extracts seldom exceed 50% efficiency <TextLink reference="17"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="18"></TextLink>. This paraprobiotic-phytochemical synergy offers a GRAS-compliant alternative particularly valuable for temperature-sensitive matrices where chemical detoxification is impractical. However, translational implementation requires addressing critical limitations: food matrix components (e.g., cereal bran fibers or dairy lipids) may obstruct binding sites or encapsulate phytochemicals, while compound stability during storage remains unverified. Furthermore, efficacy against hydroxylated metabolites (e.g., AFM1) or co-occurring mycotoxins (ochratoxin, fumonisin) warrants investigation <TextLink reference="19"></TextLink>, <TextLink reference="20"></TextLink>. </Pgraph><Pgraph>Future research should prioritize in vivo validation through toxicokinetic studies measuring serum AFB1-albumin adducts in mammalian models, alongside efficacy testing in naturally contaminated commodities (maize, pistachios) under real-world storage conditions. Formulation science approaches like microencapsulation could enhance phytochemical bioavailability and prevent undesirable interactions between polyphenols and paraprobiotic surfaces <TextLink reference="21"></TextLink>. Transcriptome-wide analyses would further elucidate off-target gene regulation and safety profiles. This integrated strategy leverages Iran-native biodiversity – particularly the understudied <Mark2>Asparagus khorasanensis</Mark2> – to establish a scalable, natural solution for global food safety challenges <TextLink reference="22"></TextLink>. The demonstrated dual-mechanism synergy provides a template for developing next-generation anti-mycotoxin interventions targeting both toxin sequestration and biosynthetic pathway interception.</Pgraph></TextBlock>
<TextBlock name="Notes" linked="yes">
<MainHeadline>Notes</MainHeadline><SubHeadline>Competing interests</SubHeadline><Pgraph>The authors declare that they have no competing interests.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Funding</SubHeadline><Pgraph>None.</Pgraph><SubHeadline>Acknowledgments </SubHeadline><Pgraph>This study was supported by the Department of Biology, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University. We thank the Research Institute of Forests and Rangelands for plant authentication and the Persian Type Culture Collection for providing microbial strains. All experiments were conducted in a certified biosafety level 2 laboratory, adhering to international safety protocols (WHO, CDC guidelines). </Pgraph><SubHeadline>Authors’ ORCIDs</SubHeadline><Pgraph><UnorderedList><ListItem level="1">Haji Kandi O: <Hyperlink href="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4783-6588">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4783-6588</Hyperlink></ListItem><ListItem level="1">Mahdi Hamdi SM: <Hyperlink href="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7167-1352">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7167-1352</Hyperlink></ListItem><ListItem level="1">Bayat M: <Hyperlink href="https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8329-4283">https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8329-4283</Hyperlink></ListItem><ListItem level="1">Tajabadi Ebrahimi M: <Hyperlink href="https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2780-3447">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2780-3447</Hyperlink></ListItem></UnorderedList></Pgraph></TextBlock>
<References linked="yes">
<Reference refNo="1">
<RefAuthor>Fouad AM</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ruan D</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>El-Senousey HK</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Chen W</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Jiang S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zheng C</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Harmful Effects and Control Strategies of Aflatoxin B1 Produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus Strains on Poultry: Review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2019</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Toxins (Basel)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>176</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Fouad AM, Ruan D, El-Senousey HK, Chen W, Jiang S, Zheng C. Harmful Effects and Control Strategies of Aflatoxin B1 Produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus Strains on Poultry: Review. Toxins (Basel). 2019 Mar;11(3):176. DOI: 10.3390/toxins11030176</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins11030176</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="2">
<RefAuthor>Lisouza FA</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Owuor PO</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Lalah JO</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Sources, distribution, and risk assessment of organochlorine pesticides in Nairobi City, Kenya</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>J Environ Sci (China)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>178-85</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Lisouza FA, Owuor PO, Lalah JO. Sources, distribution, and risk assessment of organochlorine pesticides in Nairobi City, Kenya. J Environ Sci (China). 2020 Oct;96:178-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.jes.2020.04.046</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2020.04.046</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="3">
<RefAuthor>Cao W</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yu P</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yang K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Cao D</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin B1: metabolism, toxicology, and its involvement in oxidative stress and cancer development</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2022</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Toxicol Mech Methods</RefJournal>
<RefPage>395-419</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Cao W, Yu P, Yang K, Cao D. Aflatoxin B1: metabolism, toxicology, and its involvement in oxidative stress and cancer development. Toxicol Mech Methods. 2022 Jul;32(6):395-419. DOI: 10.1080/15376516.2021.2021339</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1080/15376516.2021.2021339</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="4">
<RefAuthor>Marchese S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Polo A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ariano A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Velotto S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Costantini S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Severino L</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin B1 and M1: Biological Properties and Their Involvement in Cancer Development</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2018</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Toxins (Basel)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>214</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Marchese S, Polo A, Ariano A, Velotto S, Costantini S, Severino L. Aflatoxin B1 and M1: Biological Properties and Their Involvement in Cancer Development. Toxins (Basel). 2018 May;10(6):214. DOI: 10.3390/toxins10060214</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins10060214</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="5">
<RefAuthor>Song C</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yang J</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wang Y</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ding G</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Guo L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Qin J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Mechanisms and transformed products of aflatoxin B1 degradation under multiple treatments: a review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2024</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr</RefJournal>
<RefPage>2263-75</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Song C, Yang J, Wang Y, Ding G, Guo L, Qin J. Mechanisms and transformed products of aflatoxin B1 degradation under multiple treatments: a review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2024;64(8):2263-75. DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2022.2121910</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2022.2121910</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="6">
<RefAuthor>Shabeer S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Asad S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Jamal A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ali A</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin Contamination, Its Impact and Management Strategies: An Updated Review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2022</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Toxins (Basel)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>307</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Shabeer S, Asad S, Jamal A, Ali A. Aflatoxin Contamination, Its Impact and Management Strategies: An Updated Review. Toxins (Basel). 2022 Apr;14(5):307. DOI: 10.3390/toxins14050307</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins14050307</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="7">
<RefAuthor>Ahlberg SH</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Joutsjoki V</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Korhonen HJ</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Potential of lactic acid bacteria in aflatoxin risk mitigation</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2015</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Int J Food Microbiol</RefJournal>
<RefPage>87-102</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Ahlberg SH, Joutsjoki V, Korhonen HJ. Potential of lactic acid bacteria in aflatoxin risk mitigation. Int J Food Microbiol. 2015 Aug;207:87-102. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.04.042</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2015.04.042</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="8">
<RefAuthor>Khani N</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Noorkhajavi G</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Soleiman RA</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Raziabad RH</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Rad AH</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Akhlaghi AP</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin Biodetoxification Strategies Based on Postbiotics</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2024</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins</RefJournal>
<RefPage>1673-86</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Khani N, Noorkhajavi G, Soleiman RA, Raziabad RH, Rad AH, Akhlaghi AP. Aflatoxin Biodetoxification Strategies Based on Postbiotics. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2024 Oct;16(5):1673-86. DOI: 10.1007/s12602-024-10242-2</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-024-10242-2</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="9">
<RefAuthor>Safari N</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Mirabzadeh Ardakani M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Hemmati R</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Parroni A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Beccaccioli M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Reverberi M</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>The Potential of Plant-Based Bioactive Compounds on Inhibition of Aflatoxin B1 Biosynthesis and Down-regulation of aflR, aflM and aflP Genes</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Antibiotics (Basel)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>728</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Safari N, Mirabzadeh Ardakani M, Hemmati R, Parroni A, Beccaccioli M, Reverberi M. The Potential of Plant-Based Bioactive Compounds on Inhibition of Aflatoxin B1 Biosynthesis and Down-regulation of aflR, aflM and aflP Genes. Antibiotics (Basel). 2020 Oct;9(11):728. DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics9110728</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9110728</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="10">
<RefAuthor>Al Khoury A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>El Khoury A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Rocher O</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Hindieh P</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Puel O</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Maroun RG</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Atoui A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Bailly JD</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Inhibition of Aflatoxin B1 Synthesis in Aspergillus flavus by Mate (Ilex paraguariensis), Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) and Green Tea (Camellia sinensis) Extracts: Relation with Extract Antioxidant Capacity and Fungal Oxidative Stress Response Modulation</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2022</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Molecules</RefJournal>
<RefPage>8550</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Al Khoury A, El Khoury A, Rocher O, Hindieh P, Puel O, Maroun RG, Atoui A, Bailly JD. Inhibition of Aflatoxin B1 Synthesis in Aspergillus flavus by Mate (Ilex paraguariensis), Rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis) and Green Tea (Camellia sinensis) Extracts: Relation with Extract Antioxidant Capacity and Fungal Oxidative Stress Response Modulation. Molecules. 2022 Dec 5;27(23):8550. DOI: 10.3390/molecules27238550.</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27238550.</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="11">
<RefAuthor>Lu S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yuan Q</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wang L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Su D</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Hu M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Guo L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kang C</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zhou T</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zhang J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin B1 contamination reduces the saponins content and anti-osteoporosis efficacy of the traditional medicine Radix Dipsaci</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2025</RefYear>
<RefJournal>J Ethnopharmacol</RefJournal>
<RefPage>118857</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Lu S, Yuan Q, Wang L, Su D, Hu M, Guo L, Kang C, Zhou T, Zhang J. Aflatoxin B1 contamination reduces the saponins content and anti-osteoporosis efficacy of the traditional medicine Radix Dipsaci. J Ethnopharmacol. 2025 Jan;337(Pt 2):118857. DOI: 10.1016/j.jep.2024.118857</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2024.118857</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="23">
<RefAuthor>Monteiro SS</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Schnorr CE</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Pasquali MAB</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Paraprobiotics and Postbiotics-Current State of Scientific Research and Future Trends toward the Development of Functional Foods</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2023</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Foods</RefJournal>
<RefPage>2394</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Monteiro SS, Schnorr CE, Pasquali MAB. Paraprobiotics and Postbiotics-Current State of Scientific Research and Future Trends toward the Development of Functional Foods. Foods. 2023 Jun;12(12):2394. DOI: 10.3390/foods12122394</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12122394</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="12">
<RefAuthor>Khosravi-Darani K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zoghi A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Jazayeri S</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Da Cruz AG</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Decontamination of aflatoxins with a focus on aflatoxin B1 by probiotic bacteria and yeasts: a review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Journal of microbiology, biotechnology and food sciences</RefJournal>
<RefPage>424-35</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Khosravi-Darani K, Zoghi A, Jazayeri S, Da Cruz AG. Decontamination of aflatoxins with a focus on aflatoxin B1 by probiotic bacteria and yeasts: a review. Journal of microbiology, biotechnology and food sciences. 2020 Dec 1;10(3):424-35. DOI: 10.15414/jmbfs.2020.10.3.424-435</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2020.10.3.424-435</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="13">
<RefAuthor>Reddy N</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Lynch B</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Gujral J</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Karnik K</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Alternatives to animal testing in toxicity testing: Current status and future perspectives in food safety assessments</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2023</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Food Chem Toxicol</RefJournal>
<RefPage>113944</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Reddy N, Lynch B, Gujral J, Karnik K. Alternatives to animal testing in toxicity testing: Current status and future perspectives in food safety assessments. Food Chem Toxicol. 2023 Sep;179:113944. DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2023.113944</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2023.113944</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="14">
<RefAuthor>Chou TC</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Theoretical basis, experimental design, and computerized simulation of synergism and antagonism in drug combination studies</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2006</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Pharmacol Rev</RefJournal>
<RefPage>621-81</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Chou TC. Theoretical basis, experimental design, and computerized simulation of synergism and antagonism in drug combination studies. Pharmacol Rev. 2006 Sep;58(3):621-81. DOI: 10.1124/pr.58.3.10</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1124/pr.58.3.10</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="15">
<RefAuthor>Bata-Vidács I</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kosztik J</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Mörtl M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Székács A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kukolya J</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Aflatoxin B1 and Sterigmatocystin Binding Potential of Non-Lactobacillus LAB Strains</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Toxins (Basel)</RefJournal>
<RefPage>799</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Bata-Vidács I, Kosztik J, Mörtl M, Székács A, Kukolya J. Aflatoxin B1 and Sterigmatocystin Binding Potential of Non-Lactobacillus LAB Strains. Toxins (Basel). 2020 Dec 14;12(12):799. DOI: 10.3390/toxins12120799</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins12120799</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="16">
<RefAuthor>Nataraj BH</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ali SA</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Behare PV</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yadav H</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Postbiotics-parabiotics: the new horizons in microbial biotherapy and functional foods</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2020</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Microb Cell Fact</RefJournal>
<RefPage>168</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Nataraj BH, Ali SA, Behare PV, Yadav H. Postbiotics-parabiotics: the new horizons in microbial biotherapy and functional foods. Microb Cell Fact. 2020 Aug;19(1):168. DOI: 10.1186/s12934-020-01426-w</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-020-01426-w</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="17">
<RefAuthor>Balsini MS</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Dovom MR</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Kadkhodaee R</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Najafi MB</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yavarmanesh M</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Effect of digestion and thermal processing on the stability of microbial cell-aflatoxin B1 complex</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefJournal>LWT</RefJournal>
<RefPage>110994</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Balsini MS, Dovom MR, Kadkhodaee R, Najafi MB, Yavarmanesh M. Effect of digestion and thermal processing on the stability of microbial cell-aflatoxin B1 complex. LWT. 2021 May 1;142:110994. DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2021.110994</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.110994</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="18">
<RefAuthor>Mogahed Fahim K</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Noah Badr A</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Gamal Shehata M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ibrahim Hassanen E</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ibrahim Ahmed L</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Innovative application of postbiotics, parabiotics and encapsulated Lactobacillus plantarum RM1 and Lactobacillus paracasei KC39 for detoxification of aflatoxin M1 in milk powder</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2021</RefYear>
<RefJournal>J Dairy Res</RefJournal>
<RefPage>429-35</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Mogahed Fahim K, Noah Badr A, Gamal Shehata M, Ibrahim Hassanen E, Ibrahim Ahmed L. Innovative application of postbiotics, parabiotics and encapsulated Lactobacillus plantarum RM1 and Lactobacillus paracasei KC39 for detoxification of aflatoxin M1 in milk powder. J Dairy Res. 2021 Nov;88(4):429-35. DOI: 10.1017/S002202992100090X</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1017/S002202992100090X</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="19">
<RefAuthor>Lázaro Á</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Vila-Donat P</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Manyes L</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Emerging mycotoxins and preventive strategies related to gut microbiota changes: probiotics, prebiotics, and postbiotics - a systematic review</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2024</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Food Funct</RefJournal>
<RefPage>8998-9023</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Lázaro Á, Vila-Donat P, Manyes L. Emerging mycotoxins and preventive strategies related to gut microbiota changes: probiotics, prebiotics, and postbiotics - a systematic review. Food Funct. 2024 Sep;15(18):8998-9023. DOI: 10.1039/d4fo01705f</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1039/d4fo01705f</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="20">
<RefAuthor>Wang L</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yue T</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Yuan Y</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wang Z</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ye M</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Cai R</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>A new insight into the adsorption mechanism of patulin by the heat-inactive lactic acid bacteria cells</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2015</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Food Control</RefJournal>
<RefPage>104-10</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Wang L, Yue T, Yuan Y, Wang Z, Ye M, Cai R. A new insight into the adsorption mechanism of patulin by the heat-inactive lactic acid bacteria cells. Food Control. 2015 Apr 1;50:104-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.08.041</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.08.041</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="21">
<RefAuthor>Hu YM</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wang YR</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zhao WB</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Ding YY</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wu ZR</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Wang GH</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Deng P</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zhang SY</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>An JX</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Zhang ZJ</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Luo XF</RefAuthor>
<RefAuthor>Liu YQ</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Efficacy of pterostilbene suppression on Aspergillus flavus growth, aflatoxin B biosynthesis and potential mechanisms</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2023</RefYear>
<RefJournal>Int J Food Microbiol</RefJournal>
<RefPage>110318</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Hu YM, Wang YR, Zhao WB, Ding YY, Wu ZR, Wang GH, Deng P, Zhang SY, An JX, Zhang ZJ, Luo XF, Liu YQ. Efficacy of pterostilbene suppression on Aspergillus flavus growth, aflatoxin B biosynthesis and potential mechanisms. Int J Food Microbiol. 2023 Nov;404:110318. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2023.110318</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2023.110318</RefLink>
</Reference>
<Reference refNo="22">
<RefAuthor>Zain ME</RefAuthor>
<RefTitle>Impact of mycotoxins on humans and animals</RefTitle>
<RefYear>2011</RefYear>
<RefJournal>J Saudi Chem Soc</RefJournal>
<RefPage>129-44</RefPage>
<RefTotal>Zain ME. Impact of mycotoxins on humans and animals. J Saudi Chem Soc. 2011 Apr;15(2):129-44. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscs.2010.06.006</RefTotal>
<RefLink>https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscs.2010.06.006</RefLink>
</Reference>
</References>
<Media>
<Tables>
<Table format="png">
<MediaNo>1</MediaNo>
<MediaID>1</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Table 1: Aflatoxin reduction in different experimental groups</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Table>
<NoOfTables>1</NoOfTables>
</Tables>
<Figures>
<Figure width="519" height="365" format="png">
<MediaNo>1</MediaNo>
<MediaID>1</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Figure 1: Standard curve for the first treatment (Standard curve was drawn by 10, 20, 40, 60, and 100 µg/ml concentration)</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Figure>
<Figure width="528" height="369" format="png">
<MediaNo>2</MediaNo>
<MediaID>2</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Figure 2: HPLC analysis of aflatoxin B1 levels following the first treatment. </Mark1></Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>Significantly different from positive control (P=0.001), @significantly different from probiotic treatment (P=0.001), $significantly different from the mixture of probiotic and paraprobiotic (P=0.001), #significantly different from DMSO control (P=0.001), &significantly different from </Mark1><Mark1><Mark2>P. granatum</Mark2></Mark1><Mark1> and </Mark1><Mark1><Mark2>A. khorasanensis</Mark2></Mark1><Mark1> extract combination (P=0.001). Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation.</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Figure>
<Figure width="762" height="428" format="png">
<MediaNo>3</MediaNo>
<MediaID>3</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Figure 3: Reduction in Aflatoxin B1 levels in various treatment groups. </Mark1></Pgraph><Pgraph><Mark1>The bar chart illustrates the percentage reduction of Aflatoxin B1 in different experimental conditions, including positive control, probiotics, paraprobiotics, individual phytochemical extracts (P. granatum and A. khorasanensis), and their combined treatments. Error bars represent standard deviations. The highest reduction was observed in the combination of paraprobiotics and phytochemical extracts, with an 85.8% reduction.</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Figure>
<Figure width="561" height="312" format="png">
<MediaNo>4</MediaNo>
<MediaID>4</MediaID>
<Caption><Pgraph><Mark1>Figure 4: HPLC analysis of aflatoxin B1 levels following the second treatment</Mark1></Pgraph></Caption>
</Figure>
<NoOfPictures>4</NoOfPictures>
</Figures>
<InlineFigures>
<NoOfPictures>0</NoOfPictures>
</InlineFigures>
<Attachments>
<NoOfAttachments>0</NoOfAttachments>
</Attachments>
</Media>
</OrigData>
</GmsArticle>]]></plaintext></textgroup></listitem></orderedlist></pgraph></textblock></origdata></gmsarticle>