Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42784316›Full record

ReviewToxins2026

Predictive Artificial Intelligence Models for Mycotoxin Surveillance and Mitigation in Poultry Production Systems.

Padmini Vaka, Laharika Kappari, Gokul V Selvaraj, Ramesh K Selvaraj, Todd J Applegate, Revathi Shanmugasundaram

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxins, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Padmini VakaDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2483-7262
Laharika KappariDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-8277-157X
Gokul V SelvarajDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-7996-605X
Ramesh K SelvarajDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, USA.
Todd J ApplegateDepartment of Poultry Science, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30605, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2406-5058
Revathi ShanmugasundaramToxicology and Mycotoxin Research Unit, U.S. National Poultry Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Athens, GA 30605, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0546-6902

Funding

Agricultural Research Service 6040-42000-046-000D
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mycotoxins are widespread contaminants in animal feeds and continue to pose serious threats to animal welfare, production efficiency, food security, and sustainable economic growth worldwide. Chickens are highly susceptible to multiple mycotoxins, such as aflatoxins (AFLs), deoxynivalenol (DON), fumonisins (FBs), zearalenone (ZEA), ochratoxin A (OTA), and T-2 toxin. Exposure to these toxins can damage intestinal integrity, compromise immune functions, impair nutrient absorption, and ultimately reduce production efficiency even at subclinical concentrations. Conventional mycotoxin detection methods, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) and chromatographic techniques, provide accurate quantification but remain expensive, labor-intensive, time-consuming, and inefficient for large-scale screening, particularly when masked mycotoxins are present. The frequent co-occurrence of multiple mycotoxins further complicates risk assessment and effective management. Emerging analytical technologies, including hyperspectral imaging, biosensors, Internet of Things (IoT)-based platforms, and machine-learning algorithms, offer promising advancements for rapid detection and predictive risk forecasting. This review summarizes the toxicological impacts of major mycotoxins on poultry, outlines critical challenges in detection and prevention, and evaluates current artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) approaches for mycotoxin identification, prediction, and management. A systematic literature search conducted across PubMed, ScienceDirect and Google Scholar identified 176 unique studies published between 2010 and 2026. Key knowledge gaps include limited availability of high-quality datasets and source code, inconsistent model interpretability, and poor reproducibility across production environments. By integrating conventional toxicology with data-driven approaches, this review highlights how predictive modeling can strengthen mycotoxin surveillance and support proactive mitigation strategies in modern poultry production systems.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceFood ContaminationMycotoxinsPoultryAnimal FeedAnimalsChickensPredictive Learning ModelsMycotoxinsartificial intelligencecontrol strategieshyperspectral imagingmachine learningmycotoxinspoultry feed safetypredictive modeling

Identifiers

PMID42784316
PMCPMC13611744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.