Fungi contamination in the chamomile, anis and mate teas
PDF (Português (Brasil))

Keywords

Chamomilla recutita
Pimpinella anisum
Ilex paraguariensis
mycotoxigenic fungi

How to Cite

1.
Carvalho S, Stuart RM, Pimentel IC, Dalzoto P do R, Gabardo J, Zawadneak MAC. Fungi contamination in the chamomile, anis and mate teas. Rev Inst Adolfo Lutz [Internet]. 2009 Jan. 1 [cited 2024 Dec. 4];68(1):91-5. Available from: https://periodicos.saude.sp.gov.br/RIAL/article/view/32747

Abstract

Microbiological evaluation on stored products such as medicinal plants has been a matter of great concern for Food Safety due to the potentiality in producing mycotoxins by some fungal species. In the present paper, the isolation, quantification and identification of potentially mycotoxigenic fungal genera in the chamomile (Chamomilla recutita),anise (Pimpinella anisum) and mate tea (Ilex paraguariensis) tea-leaf samples are reported. The analyzed tea-leaf samples were purchased from stores located in the city of Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil, and they were evaluated in the forms of cool infusion (pouring cool water on the leaves), regular infusion (pouring hot liquid on the leaves) and leaves boiling process. In chamomile, mate tea and anis tea-leaf samples analyzed in infusion form, no significant differences on CFU/g values were showed. The cool infusion forms of chamomile and anis teas presented some significant differences, but not in mate tea cool infusion. The fungal genera isolated from analyzed samples were Aspergillus sp (35.9%); Penicillium sp (9.4%); Fusarium sp (0.21%); Rhizopus sp (11.5%), Ulocladium sp (18.4%)and Mycelia sterilia (6.84%). The potentially mycotoxigenic fungus Aspergillus sp was the most frequent in all of analyzed tea samples, followed by Penicillium sp e Fusarium sp. Considering that the potentially mycotoxigenic fungi remain in tea samples even after being treated by infusion and boiling processes, some strategies should be implemented to guarantee the food quality and safety.
https://doi.org/10.53393/rial.2009.v68.32747
PDF (Português (Brasil))

References

1. Calixto JB. Effi cacy, safety, quality control, marketing and regulatory guidelines for herbal medicines (phytotherapeutic agents). Braz J Med Biol Res. 2000; 33(2): 179-89.

2. Aquino S, Gonçalez E, Rossi MH, Dártora MMPA, Silva PV, Corrêa B, Villavicencio ALC. Efeitos da radiação gama na contaminação fúngica de espinheira santa (Maytenus ilicifolia). Reunião Anual do Instituto Biológico 2005; 72(2); 71.

3. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. ANVISA. Resolução RDC nº 12, de 2 jan. 2001. Estabelece padrões microbiológicos sanitários para alimentos. Diário Ofi cial [da] República Federativa do Brasil, Brasília, 10 jan. 2001. p. 45.4.

4. Bugno A, Buzzo AA, Nakamura CT, Pereira TC, Matos D, Pinto TJA. Avaliação da contaminação microbiana em drogas vegetais. Rev Bras Cienc Farm. 2005; 41 (4): 491-7.

5. Borges LR, Pimentel IC, Beux MR, Talamini A. Contagem de fungos no controle de qualidade da erva-mate (Ilex paraguariensisSt.-Hill) e isolamento de gêneros potencialmente micotoxigênicos. Bol CPPA 2002;20(1): 103-10.

6. Camargo R. Tecnologia dos Produtos Agropecuários. São Paulo: Nobel, 1984. 298p.

7. Hsieh DPH, Atkinson DN. Bifuranoid mycotoxins: their genotoxicity and carcinogenicity. Adv Exp Med Biol 1991; 283: 525-32.

8. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária [ANVISA]. Resolução nº 274 de 15 de out. 2002: Regulamento técnico Mercosul, sobre limites máximos de afl atoxinas admissíveis no leite, no amendoim, no milho. Brasília (DF); Diário Ofi cial União; 16 out. 2002.

9. Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations [FAO]. Micotoxinas em grãos. [online]. Folheto técnico nº 3. [cited 2008 05 mai]; Avaliable from http: URL: //www.fao.org/WAIRDOCS/X5012O/X5012O00.HTM.

10. Furlaneto L, Marins VD, Endo R. Qualidade microbiológica de drogas vegetais comercializadas nas ruas da cidade de Londrina/PR e de seus infusos. Saúde em Revista, 2003; 5(10): 49-52.

11. World Health Organization (WHO). Quality control methods for medicinal plant materials. Geneva, 1998, 115 p.

12. Barnett HC, Hunter BB. Illustrated genera of imperfect fungi. 3ª ed. Minneapólis: Burguess publications, 1986. 241p.

13. Kern ME, Blevins KS. Micologia médica. 2ª edição, São Paulo: Premier; 1999. 256p.

14. Hoog GS, Guarro J. Atlas of Clinical Fungi. Centraalbureau voor Schimelcultures/Universitat rovira i Virgili, ed. 2004. 1126p.

15. Silva FAS. The ASSISTAT Software: statistical assistance. In: International Conference on Computers in Agriculture. American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1996; 6: 294-8.

16. Rupollo G, Gutkoski LC, Marini LJ, Elias MC.Sistemas de armazenamento hermético e convencional na conservabilidade de grãos de aveia. Cienc Rural 2004; 34(6):1715-22.

17. Rocha LO, Soares MMSR, Corrêa CL. Análise da contaminação fúngica em amostras de Cassia acutifolia (sene) e Peumus boldus (Molina) Lyons (boldo-do-chile) comercializados na cidade de Campinas, Brasil. Rev Bras Cien Farmac 2004; 40(4): 521-7.

18. Bernardi E, Caldeira MF, Nascimento JS. Identificação de fungos filamentosos em erva-mate (Ilex paraguariensis st. Hil.). Arq Inst Biol. 2005; 72(4): 489-93.

19. Araújo ALD, Ohara MT. Qualidade microbiológica de drogas vegetais comercializadas em feira de São Paulo e de infusos derivados. Rev Bras Cienc Farmac 2000; 36: 129-37.

20. Martins HM, Martins ML, Dias MI, Bernardo F. Evaluation of microbiological quality of medicinal plants used in natural infusions. Int J Food Microb 2001;68: 149-51.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2009 Instituto Adolfo Lutz Journal

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.