Czech Mycology 52(2): 125–137             Article published: 20th April, 2000 doi: 10.33585/cmy.52202


Fungal association and deterioration of Oil-type Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) seed during storage.

Full article   (pdf, 1311 kB)        


Different fungal species viz. Aspergillus Jiavus, A. Jumigalus, A. niger, A. sydowii, Emericella nidulans, Mucorcircinelloides and Pénicillium chrysogenum were isolated from commercial safflower seeds. The total number of fungi increased with raising the moisture content of the seeds from 15 to 25 % and reached a maximum level after 3 months of storage. Aspergillus was the dominant genus at 25°C. However, Pénicillium was dominant at 10°C. Germination of seeds significantly decreased with increasing moisture content and length of storage. Where no germination in seed at 25 % moisture content was observed after 5 months of storage at v-â 25°C, there was a perceptible increase in freefatty acidscontent, especially at high moisture and temperatures. This increase in free fatty acids positively correlated with the infestation of seeds by P. chrysogenum at 10°C, and A. flavus and A. niger at 25°C. In artificially inoculated seeds (25 % moisture content) by A. Jiavus, aflatoxin production reached their maximum level after I month and then decreased. Seed deterioration was accompanied by a corresponding rise in free fatty acids, free amino acids and soluble protein. The high levels of autolytic enzymes (amylase, cellulase, lipase and protease) detected in seed fungi clearly indicate the important role of these enzymes in seed deterioration. Also, the carcurnin and turmerol oils of safflower promoted the growth and lipase activity of A. Jiavus. Thus, the oils encourage seed infestation and did not make the safflower safe from deterioration.

Keywords:     safflower, mycoflora, mycotoxin, oil, protein, sugars, enzymes, germination

Full citation:

Hasan H. A. H. (2000): Fungal association and deterioration of Oil-type Safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) seed during storage. – Czech Mycology 52(2): 125–137. copy to clipboard

doi: 10.33585/cmy.52202

<<< back to CM content

page generated in 0.0056 sec.
© 2024   Czech Scientific Society for Mycology   |   czech mycology   |   home