Imported feed grains, storage and mycotoxins: a practical guide for compound feed mills

  • Oct 8, 2026

Imported feed grains, storage and mycotoxins: a practical guide for compound feed mills

Why imported grain matters

Across the Middle East and North Africa, imports were estimated to supply 74% of the grain used for animal feed over 2015–2020, with maize and barley the main feed grains [1]. Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries combine high dependence on food imports with limited arable land and water scarcity [2]. In Saudi Arabia specifically, limited domestic production capacity means substantial imports of animal feed [3].

For a compound mill this means that the mycotoxin risk of a batch is set partly in a field thousands of kilometres away, then added to during the sea voyage, port handling and storage on site. Each stage can be managed, but only if the mill knows what it is looking for.

Field moulds and storage moulds

Grain fungi are commonly grouped into field fungi, which colonise the crop before harvest (mainly Fusarium and Alternaria), and storage fungi, mainly Aspergillus and Penicillium, which can increase during storage when conditions favour them [4]. The split is not absolute: storage fungi may be more common in the field at lower latitudes [4], and aflatoxin-producing fungi are found especially in hot, humid climates, with contamination arising both before and after harvest [5].

Most field fungi do not infect grain after harvest, although they can produce mycotoxins before or just after harvest [4]. Fusarium can keep growing if grain is not dried properly [13]. Aspergillus and Penicillium, which include the producers of aflatoxins and ochratoxin A, can multiply in storage [4][5][9]. So the Fusarium toxins (DON, zearalenone, fumonisins, T-2/HT-2) are mainly an origin and drying issue, while aflatoxins and ochratoxin A can also increase during the voyage and on site.

The main mycotoxins at a glance

Mycotoxin Main producing fungi Commodities most affected Main effects in livestock
Aflatoxin B1 Aspergillus flavus, A. parasiticus [5] Maize; peanuts and peanut products [12] Poultry: poorer performance, lower immunity, organ damage, reduced egg production [12]; suppressed cell-mediated immunity [5]. Dairy ruminants: aflatoxin M1 appears in milk [11].
Fumonisins (B1, B2) Fusarium verticillioides, F. proliferatum [6] Cereals, especially maize [6] EFSA judged the risk low for poultry and very low for ruminants [6]. Chickens: kidney damage, diarrhoea, reduced weight gain reported [12].
Deoxynivalenol (DON) Fusarium species [7] Wheat, barley, oats, rye and maize [7] Adverse effects not expected in ruminants or poultry at mean EU dietary levels [7]. At high dietary concentrations, EFSA saw a potential risk of chronic adverse effects in fish [7].
Zearalenone (ZEN) Fusarium species, particularly F. graminearum [8] Cereal grains [8] Oestrogenic. Effects on oestrous cycle in sheep reported [8]. Poultry regarded as quite tolerant [8].
Ochratoxin A (OTA) Penicillium verrucosum, Aspergillus ochraceus, A. carbonarius [9] Maize, wheat, barley, rye; in warmer regions A. ochraceus mainly on peanuts and soybeans [9] Kidney and liver damage, immunosuppression, poorer performance; monogastrics more susceptible than ruminants, whose rumen microbes largely detoxify OTA [9]. Considered the most important cause of poultry nephropathy [9].
T-2 and HT-2 toxins F. poae, F. sporotrichioides, F. langsethiae [11] Highest levels in oats and oat products [10] Poultry: immunosuppression and lesions (for example, spleen) reported [12]. Calves and lambs: gastrointestinal lesions at high exposure [11]. EFSA judged ruminant risk unlikely to be a concern and poultry risk low at estimated EU exposures [17].

Ruminants are generally less susceptible than monogastrics because rumen microbes can degrade, deactivate or bind several mycotoxins [11]. Aflatoxin needs particular care in dairy herds: in the rumen, aflatoxin B1 is converted to several metabolites including aflatoxin M1, which is found in milk [11].

Storage conditions that favour mould

The Codex Alimentarius code of practice for cereals gives internationally agreed guidance [13]:

  • Moisture: cereals should be dried to moisture levels below those that support mould growth in storage, "generally less than 15%". The code's annex on ochratoxin A goes further: grain should be dried to a moisture content corresponding to a water activity (aw) below 0.70, which it equates to less than 14% moisture in small grains [13].
  • Temperature: measure stored-grain temperature at fixed intervals. A rise of 2–3 °C may indicate microbial growth or insect infestation [13].
  • Aeration: where possible, aerate to keep temperatures uniform, and check moisture and temperature regularly [13].
  • Condensation: protect shipments from extra moisture and avoid temperature swings that cause condensation, which can lead to local moisture build-up and mould growth [13].
  • Insects and hygiene: use good housekeeping to keep insects and fungi down in storage [13].

These are cereal figures. Safe moisture differs by commodity and grain size, so oilseed meals such as soybean meal need their own specification. In Saudi Arabia, SFDA requires feed warehouses to have temperature and humidity gauges with records, adequate ventilation, measures against dripping or condensation, and temperature and humidity checks on incoming materials [14].

Regulatory limits

European Union: maximum levels (binding). Directive 2002/32/EC sets aflatoxin B1 limits in mg/kg relative to feed with a moisture content of 12% [15]:

Product Aflatoxin B1 (mg/kg, 12% moisture)
Feed materials 0.02
Complementary and complete feed 0.01
Compound feed for dairy cattle and calves, dairy sheep and lambs, dairy goats and kids, and young poultry 0.005
Compound feed for cattle (except dairy cattle and calves), sheep (except dairy sheep and lambs), goats (except dairy goats and kids) and poultry (except young animals) 0.02

Only the ruminant and poultry categories are shown; the Directive lists further categories.

Feed above a maximum level may not be mixed with other feed to dilute it [15].

European Union: guidance values. Commission Recommendation 2006/576/EC sets guidance values, also in mg/kg at 12% moisture [16]. Selected values for ruminants, poultry and fish, plus general cereal and compound-feed values:

Mycotoxin Product Guidance value (mg/kg, 12% moisture)
DON Cereals and cereal products (except maize by-products) 8
Maize by-products 12
Compound feed (general) 5
Compound feed for calves (< 4 months), lambs and kids 2
ZEN Cereals and cereal products (except maize by-products) 2
Maize by-products 3
Compound feed for calves, dairy cattle, sheep (including lambs) and goats (including kids) 0.5
OTA Cereals and cereal products 0.25
Compound feed for poultry 0.1
Fumonisins B1 + B2 Maize and maize products 60
Compound feed for fish 10
Compound feed for poultry, calves (< 4 months), lambs and kids 20
Compound feed for adult ruminants (> 4 months) and mink 50

The cereal values were set for the most tolerant species and are upper guidance values. For more sensitive species, the Recommendation expects manufacturers to apply lower values to cereals [16].

T-2 and HT-2. Recommendation 2013/165/EU sets indicative levels for the sum of T-2 and HT-2 in feed (relative to 12% moisture): 2,000 µg/kg (2 mg/kg) for oat milling products (husks), 500 µg/kg (0.5 mg/kg) for other cereal products, and 250 µg/kg (0.25 mg/kg) for compound feed other than cat feed [17]. These are triggers for investigation, not feed safety limits [17].

Saudi Arabia and the GCC. SFDA prohibits feed factories from accepting feed materials that exceed the maximum legislative limits approved by the Authority [14]. Two GCC technical regulations are relevant: GSO 193:2021, Contaminants and toxins in food and feed [18], and GSO 2814:2026, Contaminants and Toxins in Feed, approved on 30 April 2026 [19]. Both are sold documents and we could not check their full texts, so we do not quote numerical limits here. Mills should get the current texts from SFDA or GSO and build their acceptance criteria on them.

United Kingdom. Directive 2002/32/EC is EU law. Mills supplying Great Britain should confirm the current domestic requirements with the Food Standards Agency or Food Standards Scotland.

A practical checklist for mills

  1. Supplier specifications and certificates of analysis. Write mycotoxin limits into contracts, based on the destination market's rules and your most sensitive species, and ask for certificates of analysis for each lot. SFDA prohibits raw materials of unknown origin [14].
  2. Representative sampling at intake. Mycotoxins are unevenly distributed. EU Regulation 152/2009, as amended, classes aflatoxins and other mycotoxins in feed materials as likely to be unevenly distributed and requires 2.5 times the usual number of incremental samples [20]. In Saudi Arabia, SFDA requires sampling according to GSO 999 and sample preparation according to GSO ISO 6498 [14].
  3. Rapid tests and laboratory confirmation. ELISA and lateral-flow strips are quick, low-cost screening tools; lateral-flow results can be read in 5–15 minutes [21]. Use HPLC or LC-MS/MS for confirmation and disputes. LC-MS can confirm identity and measure many mycotoxins at once [21]. SFDA requires in-house laboratories to follow the international standard on general requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories (ISO/IEC 17025), and external laboratories to be licensed [14].
  4. Moisture and temperature control. Measure moisture and temperature at intake and reject material that is out of specification or shows damage or decay [14]. Hold cereals at or below the Codex moisture guidance [13].
  5. Silo hygiene and aeration. Keep storage areas clean and dry [13][14], aerate to keep temperatures uniform, and watch temperature trends for the 2–3 °C rise that can signal trouble [13].
  6. First in, first out. SFDA requires FIFO and FEFO stock rotation in warehouses and silos [14].
  7. Monitoring and records. Keep written self-monitoring plans for raw materials and finished feed, and retain reference samples for at least 180 days [14]. Record moisture, temperature and humidity [13].
  8. Where additives fit. The EU has a functional group of technological additives called "substances for reduction of the contamination of feed by mycotoxins": substances that can suppress or reduce absorption, promote excretion of mycotoxins or modify their mode of action [22]. Products are commonly described as sorbents or binders (clays, for example) and as enzymes or micro-organisms that transform mycotoxins [11]. Each EU authorisation covers a named substance and sets its conditions of use. These additives must not be used as a way around maximum or guidance levels [22]. They add to good sourcing, storage and testing; they do not replace them.

If you would like to talk through mycotoxin risk management for your mill, contact BioSpec.

References

  1. Rahimi J, Smerald A, Moutahir H, Khorsandi M, Butterbach-Bahl K. The potential consequences of grain-trade disruption on food security in the Middle East and North Africa region. Frontiers in Nutrition 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2023.1239548
  2. Elzaki RM. Food Security–Climate Change–National Income Nexus: Insights from GCC Countries. Foods 2026. https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13025400
  3. Alnafissa M, Alotaibi BA, Aldawdahi N, Imran Azeem M, Muddassir M. Optimizing animal care through compound feed management in Saudi Arabia. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems 2024; 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2024.1406715
  4. Mannaa M, Kim KD. Influence of temperature and water activity on deleterious fungi and mycotoxin production during grain storage. Mycobiology 2017; 45(4): 240–254. https://doi.org/10.5941/MYCO.2017.45.4.240
  5. EFSA CONTAM Panel. Risk assessment of aflatoxins in food. EFSA Journal 2020; 18(3): 6040. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6040
  6. EFSA CONTAM Panel. Risks for animal health related to the presence of fumonisins, their modified forms and hidden forms in feed. EFSA Journal 2018; 16(5): 5242. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5242
  7. EFSA CONTAM Panel. Risks to human and animal health related to the presence of deoxynivalenol and its acetylated and modified forms in food and feed. EFSA Journal 2017; 15(9): 4718. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4718
  8. EFSA CONTAM Panel. Risks for animal health related to the presence of zearalenone and its modified forms in feed. EFSA Journal 2017; 15(7): 4851. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4851
  9. EFSA CONTAM Panel. Risks for animal health related to the presence of ochratoxin A (OTA) in feed. EFSA Journal 2023; 21(11): 8375. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8375
  10. EFSA. Human and animal dietary exposure to T-2 and HT-2 toxin. EFSA Journal 2017; 15(8): 4972. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4972
  11. Gallo A, Giuberti G, Frisvad JC, Bertuzzi T, Nielsen KF. Review on mycotoxin issues in ruminants. Toxins 2015; 7(8): 3057–3111. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins7083057
  12. Ochieng PE, Scippo ML, Kemboi DC, Croubels S, Okoth S, et al. Mycotoxins in poultry feed and feed ingredients from Sub-Saharan Africa and their impact on the production of broiler and layer chickens: a review. Toxins 2021; 13(9): 633. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins13090633
  13. Codex Alimentarius. Code of Practice for the Prevention and Reduction of Mycotoxin Contamination in Cereals (CAC/RCP 51-2003), in FAO/WHO, Prevention and Reduction of Food and Feed Contamination, 1st edition, Rome 2012. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/1798500a-c71a-43a4-8010-a8c465e9a3e9/content
  14. Saudi Food and Drug Authority. Technical Requirements for Feed Factories and Warehouses. 2025. https://www.sfda.gov.sa/sites/default/files/2025-04/TechnicalRequirementsFeedFactoriesWarehouses_0.pdf
  15. Directive 2002/32/EC on undesirable substances in animal feed, consolidated version of 28 November 2019, Annex I Section II and Article 5. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02002L0032-20191128
  16. Commission Recommendation 2006/576/EC, consolidated version of 2 August 2016 (as amended by Recommendation (EU) 2016/1319). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:02006H0576-20160802
  17. Commission Recommendation 2013/165/EU on the presence of T-2 and HT-2 toxin in cereals and cereal products. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reco/2013/165/oj
  18. GCC Standardization Organization. GSO 193:2021 Contaminants and toxins in food and feed (catalogue entry). https://www.gso.org.sa/store/standards/GSO:781074/GSO%20193:2021?lang=en
  19. GCC Standardization Organization. GSO 2814:2026 Contaminants and Toxins in Feed (catalogue entry). https://dgsm.gso.org.sa/store/standards/GSO:1080630/GSO%202814:2026?lang=en
  20. Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/2009, Annex I as replaced by Commission Regulation (EU) No 691/2013, points 5.2 and 5.3. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/691/oj
  21. Singh J, Mehta A. Rapid and sensitive detection of mycotoxins by advanced and emerging analytical methods: a review. Food Science & Nutrition 2020; 8: 2183–2204. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1474
  22. Commission Regulation (EC) No 386/2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 (new functional group of feed additives), recitals 2–3 and Article 1. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2009/386/oj