Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Food Chemistry Advances

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/focha

Reduction of Aflatoxin contamination in coconut oil using concentrated

solar radiation
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun, M.P.G. Vanniarachchy (Mihiri)*
Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Gangodawila, Nugegoda, Sri Lanka

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Global demand for edible coconut oil has a rapid growth due to its health benefits. However, the susceptibility to
Aflatoxin carcinogenic mold contamination, aflatoxin, poses a significant global health concern. Concentrated solar ra­
Coconut oil diation was used in this study as a new initiative to investigate the more efficient elimination of aflatoxin in
HPLC
coconut oil. Samples were collected from the Colombo district, Sri Lanka, as branded (n = 3) and unbranded (n =
Concentrated solar radiation
5). The initial aflatoxin content was determined using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC-FLD)
system with AflaStarTM FIT immunoaffinity columns. They were exposed to concentrated solar radiation for 10
(T-1), 20 (T-2), and 30 (T-3) minutes respectively, using a parabolic proto-type solar concentrator. The remaining
aflatoxin content was re-determined after each treatment. Following each treatment (T-1, T-2 and T-3), the
maximum allowed total Aflatoxin and Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) content of all coconut oil samples were lower than the
set European Union (EU) limits (4.2 µg/kg) with a mean total Aflatoxin reduction of 94.00 ± 6.48 %, 98.67 ±
2.80 %, 100.00 ± 0.00 % respectively. T-1 and T-2 treatments at mean concentrated solar radiation levels (W/
m2) of 971 ± 29 and 945 ± 65.4 were recognized as the most efficient at removing total and AFB1 aflatoxin
tainted in coconut oil at higher levels.

1. Introduction has received attention for its hypocholesterolemic, anticancer, anti-

The coconut tree (Cocos nucifera L.) is regarded as one of nature’s
most valuable gifts to mankind. The tree produces coconuts as fruits.
Once a coconut palm has been planted, it might take up to seven years
for coconuts to begin bearing fruit (Srivastava et al., 2016). Food from
the coconut can be consumed as fiber, fruit (or meat), milk, oil, and
water. Coconut trees are also known as the “Tree of Life” due to their
versatility in various products.
Coconut oil has been specifically highlighted in this study due to its
considerable demand and widespread use as a commercially viable
edible oil. Notably, Sri Lanka stands at the 8th position globally among
the top countries with the highest coconut oil market in 2022, with a per
capita consumption of 1.62 kg. Other countries in Asia pacific region,
such as Malaysia (1.23 kg per capita) and Vietnam (1.13 kg per capita),
trail behind Sri Lanka. With a Compound Annual Growth Rate of 7.35%
over the forecast period of 2021–2028, the global coconut oil market is
anticipated to increase from $2.24 billion in 2021 to $3.69 billion in
2028 (“Market Research Report- Coconut Oil Market Size”, 2022).
Coconut oil is extremely resistant to oxidation in the atmosphere. It
hepatosteatotic, antidiabetic, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antibac­
terial, and skin moisturizing characteristics in addition to its use in
cooking (Deen et al., 2021). The oil is important in skin care, hair care,
stress relief, weight loss, cholesterol level maintenance, immunomodu­
latory effects, cardiovascular uses, and more recently, recognized as a
potential therapeutic strategy for Alzheimer’s disease (Sandupama
et al., 2022; Kappally et al., 2015).
Copra is traditionally used to make coconut oil. The coconut meat
can be separated from the entire coconut shell to create copra, which is
then sun- and smoke-dried for 6–8 days. The copra is then broken up into
small pieces and heated on a stove for about 30 min. An expeller and a
filter press are used to extract the oil from cooked copra. The following
are the steps and actions involved in the current mechanical expression
of coconut (Bordin et al., 2014). The coconut meat is first removed from
the broken coconut shells. The fresh coconut meat is then minced and
cut into the necessary size of thin flakes as needed. In a cooker, the
coconut meat is heated in thin flakes for 90 min at a high temperature.
After that, using an oil expeller, the oil is extracted from the
heat-treated, cooked coconut meat (at a temperature of about 70 ◦ C).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: mihiripg@sjp.ac.lk (M.P.G. Vanniarachchy).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.focha.2023.100513
Received 27 June 2023; Received in revised form 8 October 2023; Accepted 1 November 2023
Available online 2 November 2023
2772-753X/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy
The oil is kept for a long time in an airtight container in a dim, cool, and
dry environment. This procedure yields a de-oiled cake that can be
consumed by people.
Standard coconut oil is considered a product obtained from the co­
conut kernel by the process of expelling with or without heat, followed
by filtration. Virgin coconut oil (VCO) is an edible oil obtained from the
milk of fresh and matured kernels of the coconut (Ismail et al., 2018),
VCO is colorless with the aroma of fresh coconut, and it has been largely
consumed for many purposes in cooking. (VCO) Refined, Bleached &
Deodorized (RBD) coconut oils get processed through chemical refining,
bleaching, and deodorization in the process of production (Ghani et al.,
2018). Different methods are used to extract oils from various areas of
the coconut.
Numerous studies conducted around the world have discovered a
significant prevalence of aflatoxin contamination in edible oils. Several
reports have shown high incidences of aflatoxin contamination in plant-
derived oils in regions of China, Sudan, India, and Sri Lanka. The high
contamination of oilseeds by aflatoxin generates concern on a global
scale due to the high consumption.
Aflatoxin, the most dangerous contaminant, has caused numerous
foodborne outbreaks, especially in tropical and subtropical regions. This
potent toxin lead to toxicity and carcinogenicity. The resulting condi­
tions are referred to as aflatoxicosis, with acute cases being fatal.
Conversely, chronic exposure lead to cancer, immunosuppression, and
various persistent pathological conditions (El-Sayed et al., 2022). Afla­
toxin normally refers to the group of difuranocoumarins produced by the
fungi varieties Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus (Strosnider
et al., 2006). Structurally, the dihydrofuran moiety contains a double
bond and the constituents linked to the coumarin moiety are important
in producing biological effects. Common aflatoxin varieties include
AFB1 (The most toxic aflatoxin), AFB2, AFG1, and AFG2. AFM1 is a
metabolic derivate of AFB1, and AFM2 is a metabolic derivate of AFB2;
both come from the metabolism of some animals and are normally found
in milk and urine.
Aflatoxins are resistant to many of the common treatments used in
food and feed processing, such as pasteurization, sterilization, and other
thermal treatments. Due to its complex structure and relatively constant
molecular orientation, aflatoxin is highly heat resistant (Yitbarek &
Tamir, 2013), especially when dry. Under health issues, aflatoxin is one
of the most powerful naturally occurring liver carcinogens known today
(Hallstrom & Thuvander, 1997). According to the CDC (Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention), health impacts range from immune
suppression and growth retardation to cancer and, in the case of severe
poisoning, liver failure, and death. Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC)
(Ismail et al., 2018), which is the 9th and 7th major type of cancer in
women and men, respectively, is the most prominent human health
impact of aflatoxins.
Recent research has shown quite high levels of contamination with
aflatoxin in branded and unbranded coconut oils, which are produced
inside Sri Lanka compared to other vegetable oils (Karunarathna et al.,
2019). Concerning coconut oil, Copra is a raw material that can contain
contaminants. Moreover, when they are exposed to wet environments,
mold production is facilitated due to less hygienic practices. Especially
at times, contaminated copra cannot be identified with the naked eye
and undergo the production procedure.
Even though the reaction pathways of aflatoxin that can occur
through the production procedure have not been investigated, it appears
to have a high possibility of opening the lactone ring with decarboxyl­
ation at higher temperatures to break down the aflatoxin Nguyen et al.
(2020). But when temperatures should be raised to higher levels, it put
the majority of the food’s nutritional and organoleptic characteristics at
risk. Chemical deviations of aflatoxin under these conditions and re­
agents are highly important to distinguish the possible ways of removing
and detoxifying it from contaminated foods. Oxidizing substances such
as ozone, sodium hypochlorite, potassium permanganate, chlorine, and
hydrogen peroxide can alter the aflatoxin molecule in a way that results
2
Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513
in the loss of fluorescence (Karunarathna et al., 2019).
Normally, physical, chemical, and biological methods are used for
aflatoxin removal. Examples of physical methods include aflatoxin
removal by extraction with solvents and degradation by high tempera­
tures and gamma or ultraviolet radiation (Rustom, 1997). Chemical
methods involve the structural degradation of compounds by com­
pounds like aldehydes, oxidizing agents, acids, bases, and several gasses.
Biological methods comprise the use of bacteria, yeast, or their respec­
tive enzymes or metabolic apparatus to degrade aflatoxins (Bordin et al.,
2014). Also, food additives, oscillating treatment with alkaline electro­
lyzed water and sunlight, γ and UV radiation, microwave heating and
solvent extraction can be used. Aqueous plant extracts have been
researched for their possible utility in aflatoxin decontamination in
recent years (Fan et al., 2013).
Apart from the other methods, solar radiation has comparatively
given promising results on Aflatoxin degradation for the contaminated
coconut oils over the other existing detoxification methods. The solar
radiation technique does not require powered machinery. Conversely,
methods based on chemical treatment would probably be prohibitively
expensive in addition to the required equipment, chemical contamina­
tions can lead to critical problems with the edibility of the oil. Since
concentrated solar radiation is a 100 % organic method with zero-
chemical usage it has the advantage of protecting the edible standards
of the oil. The planet receives about 1000 W/m2 of solar irradiation
every day, according to estimates. As a tropical country, Sri Lanka’s
annual solar radiation is approximately 1000 W/m2 (Renné et al., 2003),
and according to measurements taken by the most recent NASA satellite
missions, the average intensity of solar radiation reaching the top of the
atmosphere directly facing the Sun is around 1360 W/m2. According to
the mean values taken from each treatment, around 950 W/m2 of solar
radiation was applied to remove the contaminated aflatoxin. Exposure
of oil to sunlight is important with the availability of sunlight with
sufficient intensity for adequate periods (Renné et al., 2003). The
amount of aflatoxin removal depends on the intensity and exposure time
of oil to the sunlight. Also, the width or thickness of the oil sample and
the type or source of the coconut oil are important. But one of the main
limitations in the solar radiation treatment of the oils appeared to be the
low penetration of radiation, through static layers of oil (Herzallah et al.,
2008; Samarajeewa et al., 1977). Also, according to a previous study
using direct sunlight, aflatoxin degradation happened with only 1.6 mm
oil thickness, which is comparatively difficult to maintain under 10
cal/cm2 (105.993 k lux) of sunlight (Gamage et al., 1985). But with the
concept of concentrated solar radiation oil thickness, the absorbance of
effective solar radiation as well as aflatoxin reduction can be increased.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Parabolic solar concentrator for the effective use of solar radiation
A parabola is the two-dimensional design of a parabolic concen­
trator. It is commonly used as a solar concentrator that reflects light. It
has the unique ability to concentrate all of the sun’s parallel rays into a
single focal point (Krothapalli & Greska, 2012). Only a truncated part of
the parabola is used in the majority of the parabolic concentrator. There
are two types of parabolic concentrators. One is to create a parabolic
dish by rotating the two-dimensional design along the x-axis, and the
other is to create a parabolic trough (Chen et al., 2009). This method is
initiated to improvise and strengthen the amount of unit radiation per
unit time period in the static coconut oil layers. Reducing the treatment
time period to have minimum oil quality deviation is the other aspect of
the concept. An improvised version of the parabolic solar concentrator
design was applied to this study considering its effective use of solar
radiation with minimal wastage.
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

2.2. Designing the concentrated solar radiator radiation.

This simple scientific equipment shown in Fig. 1 was designed • T-1 – 10 min
especially for this study using the concentrated solar radiation concept. • T-2 – 20 min
Parabolic photo-type solar concentrator design is applied because of the • T-3 – 30 min
distinct property that it has as it can focus all the parallel rays from the
sun to a single focal point. Exposure time was kept between 11.30 and Three portions of a single sample went through the treatment pro­
12.30 p.m. to receive the maximum amount of parallel rays throughout cedures and their remaining aflatoxin content was measured after each
the treatment procedure. The focal point is set at 1.5 cm in this design to treatment as well.
improvise the unit thickness of oil that can be used to expose directly. It Following were the mean solar radiations after considering the
increases the efficiency of the treatment process while increasing the whole set of samples.
energy exposure to sunlight. This is the side elevation of the developed
solar radiation apparatus. It has a 30 cm length while keeping the 1.5 cm • T-1– 971 ± 29.1 W/m2
focal point. 500–600 ml of coconut oil can be exposed to solar radiation • T-2 – 945 ± 65.4 W/m2
using this 30 cm lengthy small apparatus model. This can be scaled up • T-3 – 954 ± 34.1 W/m2
easily for industrial needs. During the treatment coconut oil filled up to 3
± 1 cm keeping the focal point in the middle and conducting the solar 2.5. HPLC instrument conditions
radiation process.
Guard cartridge: Inertsil ODS-3 (5 µm,4 mm,10 mm or equivalent),
Analytical column: Intersil ODS-3 V (5 µm, 4.6 mm, 150 mm or equiv­
2.3. Coconut oil samples
alent), Mobile phase - 60/40 v/v water: methanol, to 1l of mobile phase,
add 119 mg of potassium bromide and 350 µL of 4 M nitric acid. The
All the samples were collected between July to August 2021 and the
stationary phase is non-polar, HPLC Pump – To deliver mobile phase,
coconut oil samples included 3 branded coconut oil samples purchased
Flow rate – 1.0 ml/per minute, Fluorescence detector – Extraction 362
from several retail shops and a supermarket in Colombo district and 5
nm, Emission: 425 nm (B1 & B2), 455 nm (G1 & G2), Injection Volume –
unbranded coconut oil samples from some random local mills in
100 µL, Injector – Autosampler / Reodyne valve. (FACT sheet of AflaS­
Colombo district. Naturally contaminated (seemed to be expelled from
tarTM FIT immunoaffinity column, Packaging unit – 25 or 500 immu­
mouldy copra) coconut oils selected by physical observation, especially
noaffinity column, Gel Bed Volume – 0.25 mL, Specification –
from small-scale local mills. Coconut oil samples were stored at ambient
Monoclonal antibodies against aflatoxin B1, B2, G1, G2, Flow rate – 1–3
temperature (21–27 ◦ C) in dark and fully covered brown bottles were
mL per min, Storage – 2–8 ◦ C.
used to store [According to ISO 661:2003 (E)]. Before use for any
experiment homogeneous nature of the sample is ensured by shaking the
2.6. HPLC method validation
sample in a closed container. Three coconut oil samples from the below
8 samples were spiked with pure aflatoxin to have a considerable afla­
As shown in Table 1, AFB1, AFG1, AFB2, and AFG2 standard solu­
toxin amount. Coconut oil samples were categorized using branding and
tions were combined and diluted with mobile phase according to a
spiking prospects as follows.
standard series. For daily calibrations, a 500 µg/kg solution was utilized
Sample NB - Natural Branded, Sample NU1 - Natural Unbranded 1
with a 4:4:1:1 ratio for each type of aflatoxin. Total aflatoxin at con­
(Sample NB & NU1 were only used as a trial to observe the validity of the
centrations of 1, 2, 5, 10, and 50 g/L in mixed calibration standards. By
research concept prior to the actual research), Sample NU2 - Natural
comparing the retention durations of the peaks with those of the cali­
Unbranded 2, Sample NU3 - Natural Unbranded 3, Sample NU4 - Natural
bration standard, the types of aflatoxin contained in the oil samples were
Unbranded 4, Sample SU - Spiked Unbranded (SU), Sample SB1 - Spiked
identified and quantified using the respective calibration curves. Cali­
Branded 1 and Sample SB2 - Spiked Branded 2.
bration verification and method validation were critical for evaluating
the HPLC instrument’s performance. After analyzing the linearity of the
2.4. Treatment procedure standard curve using linear regression, the coefficient of determination
(R2) should be greater than or equal to 0.995 for satisfactory instrument
Initial aflatoxin content of each coconut oil sample is determined. performance, and it was kept greater than or equal to 0.9996 throughout
Then coconut oil samples were exposed to concentrated solar radiation all experiments.
for at following time slots. Every minute of solar radiation was
measured. Measured solar radiation was used to have an idea about the
necessary mean radiation and aflatoxin reduction. The following time
slots were selected to conduct the treatments using concentrated solar

Fig. 1. Sketch diagrams of the concentrated solar radiator (A) Front elevation where parabolic surface concentrates the solar radiation to the focal point (left) and (B)
Side elevation (right).

3
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

Table 1 pressure to the bottom of the column, the remaining liquids were
HPLC method validation parameters for determining aflatoxins in coconut oil. extracted.
Analyte Day Mean RSDr RSDR LOD LOQ The syringe barrel was removed, and an auto sample vial was placed
Recovery (%) (%) (%) (μg/kg) (μg/kg) under the column to collect eluents using filter 1.5–3.0 ml of 100% HPLC
AFB1 1 100.7 1.65 4.72 0.17 0.50 grade methanol was used to elute the sample using Micro filters – PTFE
2 99.6 2.30 (Agilent). Any residual liquid was eliminated following the application
3 105.3 2.20 of the second portion by applying little pressure to the column top. This
4 95.1 0.91 eluent was utilized for HPLC system direct analysis.
5 93.6 1.07
AFB2 1 103.3 3.11 6.37 0.03 0.10
2 104 1.57 2.8. Statistical analysis
3 95.3 2.67
4 90.5 2.21 The test results were given descriptive statistics such as mean and
5 92.6 2.19
standard deviation, and a paired sample t-test was used to determine
AFG1 1 105.8 1.64 5.08 0.17 0.50
2 102.5 0.76 whether there was a significant difference in the quality parameters
3 96.8 0.86 before and after each treatment, and the means were compared to the
4 95.3 1.87 standard coconut oil regulations to see if they were within the limits.
5 94.1 2.05 Minitab 19 statistical software was used to conduct the statistical anal­
AFG2 1 101.8 1.73 3.75 0.04 0.12
2 110.3 1.70
ysis, with a significance level of 0.05 (95 %).
3 109.7 2.04
4 104.1 1.08 3. Results and discussion
5 102.9 1.92
The present research has explored the use of concentrated solar ra­
diation as a promising technique for reducing aflatoxin levels in edible
2.7. Sample preparation and HPLC determination of aflatoxin
oils.
The findings of the present investigation revealed that aflatoxin B1
Contaminated aflatoxin were separated from the coconut oil samples
accounts for the majority of aflatoxin contamination in coconut oils as
using immunoaffinity columns prior to the instrumental analysis to
shown in Table 2. However, all the other samples except for Sample SB1
determine their amounts quantitatively. Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 & G2 from
and NU3 were not contaminated with aflatoxin G2. Regardless of the
food products were determined and the principle was to use the
specific type of aflatoxin, all contaminated coconut oil samples (n = 8)
monoclonal antibodies against aflatoxin, which are covalently bound to
showed a significant reduction in concentration following treatments
gel particles. After a short rinsing phase, the isolated aflatoxin can be
with concentrated solar radiation.
eluted using methanol. The eluent is suitable for determining the con­
Maximum permissible limits of aflatoxin in coconut oil according to
centrations of aflatoxin directly by HPLC (High-Performance Liquid
the European Union standards are total aflatoxin content in coconut oil
Chromatography) system and Immunoaffinity columns were used for
at 4 µg/kg and aflatoxin B1 content at 2 µg/kg. However, a baseline
comparatively rapid purification.
survey carried out in several districts of Sri Lanka detected Aflatoxin
All the chemicals and reagents including methanol were HPLC grade
levels exceeding 30 ppm in 1.25% of coconut oil samples with a range of
& stored at 20–28 ◦ C at room temperature. The coconut oil samples were
1.86–68.71 ppm (Gamlath et al., 2021). This warrants the need to
extracted using the AflaStarTM FIT – Immunoaffinity Columns accord­
reduce aflatoxin contamination to permissible limits.
ing to instructions of the column manufacturer and aflatoxin determi­
nation is done using the AOAC 991.31 standards regarding HPLC-FLD
3.1. Sequential aflatoxin reduction in sample NU4
(Agilent Technologies, Waldbronn, Germany – 1260 series) instrument.
Because of its precision, high sensitivity, and ease of automation, high-
Among the samples tested, Sample NU4 exhibited the highest level of
performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection (HPLC-
aflatoxin contamination. Fig. 2 provide the instrumental figures for the
FLD) is used for the determination of aflatoxin Wacoo et al. (2018). The
reduction of aflatoxin following each treatment specifically for Sample
extraction procedure prior to the instrumental phase called wet work
NU4.
can be categorized into four parts. They are; Extraction, Dilution,
Fig. 2(A) displays ideal peaks for aflatoxin B1, B2 and G1 without any
Sample application and Elusion.
splitting. This confirms the presence of significant aflatoxin contami­
Representative 25.0 g (Using Laboratory Analytical Balance - Model:
nation in the sample.
PA 214, Max 210 g, d 0.0001 g) portion of the homogeneous coconut oil
In Fig. 2(B), after exposure to concentrated solar radiation (T-1), split
samples was poured into conical flasks and 5.0 g of sodium chloride was
peaks can be observed. This is attributed to the exposure to solar radi­
added. 80/20 (v/v) ratio HPLC grade methanol/water (Distilled /
ation, which provides a broad spectrum of energy to facilitate secondary
deionized water) solvent mixture was added to the conical flasks and
degradation reactions in combination with coconut oil. In contrast, UV
then the horizontal shaker was used for mixing the content well enough
radiation of fixed energy levels does not exhibit the same range of
for aflatoxin extraction for 30 min. Here the solution was diluted up to
contribution to the removal of aflatoxin from the extracted layers.
20 % (v/v) and the pH was adjusted to the 6–8 range using the sodium
Consequently, solar radiation contributes more significantly to the
hydroxide if necessary. The diluted solution extract was taken using
degradation of aflatoxin B1 in coconut oil. The wide spectrum of energy
Filter Funnels (Whatman No 113) and allowed to travel through the
in the solar radiation along with the presence of trace moisture and
column using a syringe barrel as a reservoir. Then the immunoaffinity
inherent acidity in coconut oil could have likely enhanced the degra­
column was mounted on an adapter. The flow rate was limited to 1–3
dation reactions.
ml/min, and the solution dripped down on its own without any assis­
Fig. 2(C) shows an increased number of split peaks that can be
tance. Throughout the process, the column and the extract were held at
considered noise peaks. The longer exposure to solar radiation in Fig. 2
room temperature, and no rinsing was required before applying the
(C) results in a more pronounced elimination of aflatoxin compared to
diluted extract to the column. After that, 20 ml of distilled water was
Fig. 2(B).
used to rinse the immunoaffinity columns. The first half of the rinse
solution was used to rinse the container, while the second half was
administered directly to the immunoaffinity column. By applying little

4
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

Table 2
Determined amounts of aflatoxin before and after the respective treatments.
Sample Treatment Total aflatoxin (µg/kg) Aflatoxin B1 Aflatoxin B2 Aflatoxin G1 Aflatoxin G2
(µg/kg) (µg/kg) (µg/kg) (µg/kg)

NB Before the treatment 7.64 4.01 ND 3.63 ND

After (T-3) ND ND ND ND ND
NU1 Before the treatment 0.63 0.56 ND ND ND
After (T-3) ND ND ND ND ND
NU2 Before the treatment 1.69 1.65 ND ND ND
After (T-1) ND ND ND ND ND
After (T-2) ND ND ND ND ND
SB1 Before the treatment 14.20 4.78 1.12 6.63 1.67
After (T-1) 2.40 ND ND 1.85 0.11
After (T-2) 0.97 ND ND 0.52 0.39
NU3 Before the treatment 10.45 5.71 1.03 2.78 0.93
After (T-1) 0.84 ND ND ND ND
After (T-2) ND ND ND ND ND
NU4 Before the treatment 127.74 85.17 3.81 38.75 ND
After (T-1) 3.64 1.36 ND 1.18 ND
After (T-2) 1.88 0.88 ND 0.93 ND
SU Before the treatment 12.99 12.78 0.20 ND ND
After (T-1) 1.05 1.04 ND ND ND
After (T-2) ND ND ND ND ND
SB2 Before the treatment 88.68 67.62 1.37 19.70 ND
After (T-1) ND ND ND ND ND
After (T-2) ND ND ND ND ND

*ND-Not Detected. (The given values are presented as mean values for triplicates from the instrument).

3.2. Comparative analysis with previous studies coconut oils.

According to the findings of Samarajeewa et al., 1988, a 75 %
degradation of aflatoxin in coconut oil was reported when allowing the
oil to move at a thickness of 1.6 ± 0.2 mm. Similarly, Javanmardi et al.,
2022 observed a 75 % reduction in aflatoxin levels in a 2 mm layer of
contaminated coconut oil using direct solar radiation. However, the
present study demonstrated that using concentrated solar radiation for
decontaminating coconut oil is a beneficial method, as the current study
utilized the application of concentrated solar radiation and increased the
oil thickness to 15 mm, resulting in an aflatoxin reduction of over 95 %.
Previous research by Samarajeewa et al., 1977, indicated that to
have a considerable reduction in aflatoxin, coconut oil required 1 and 2
h of solar radiation exposure at midday. According to the review by
Wanniarachchi et al., 2023 aflatoxin contaminated Peanut oil has shown
45 % of comparatively low reduction even after 2 h of UV irradiation. In
contrast, this study achieved a high percentage of aflatoxin reduction
within 10 min (T-1) period of concentrated solar radiation.
Comparatively, according to Sipos et al., 2021 reducing aflatoxin in
soybean feed required heat treatments at 100 ◦ C and 150 ◦ C heat
treatments for 90 min, resulting in reductions of 41.9 % and 81.2 %,
respectively. In this study, concentrated solar radiation increased the
temperature only up to 50 ◦ C but achieved a high percentage (over 90 %
after each treatment) of aflatoxin reduction.
The aflatoxin reduction was independent of the baseline aflatoxin
content, which aligns with similar claims by Herzallah et al., 2008 and
Samarajeewa, Jayatilaka, and Ranjithan (1985) for studies on aflatoxin
reduction from solar irradiation.
3.3. Impact of the treatment
According to results in Table 3, the reduction percentages of natural
samples NU2 (100 %), NU3 (92 %) & NU4 (97 %) average to 96.33 ±
4.41 for T-1 treatment. Similarly for T-2 treatment the reduction per­
centages of natural samples NU2 (100 %), NU3 (100 %) & NU4 (99 %)
average to 99.67 ± 0.58%. The reduction percentages spiked samples
SU (92 %), SB1 (83 %) and SB2 (100 %) average to 91.67 ± 8.50% for T-
1 treatment. Similarly for T-2 treatment the reduction percentages of
natural samples SU (100 %), SB1 (93 %) and SB2 (100 %) average to
99.67 ± 0.58%.In all treatments, spiked (from aflatoxin stock solution)
coconut oils had a higher decrease level of aflatoxin than natural
The percentage reduction of unbranded oil samples NU2 (100 %),
NU3 (92 %), NU4 (97 %) and SU (92 %) average to 95.25 ± 3.95 % at T-
1 treatment. Similarly the percentage reduction of unbranded oil sam­
ples NU2 (100 %), NU3 (100 %), NU4 (99 %) and SU (100 %) average to
99.75 ± 0.50% at T-2 treatment. Considering the branded oil samples
SB1 (83 %) and SB2 (100 %) the average percentage reduction was
shown at 91.50 ± 12.02% for T-1 treatment and for T-2 treatment, SB1
(93 %) and SB2 (100 %) average to 96.50 ± 4.95%. Comparatively high
reduction tendency was shown in the unbranded oil samples (NU2, NU3,
NU4 and SU). It validated the capability of this method to be used in
local coconut oil production plants that produce unbranded oil.
The percentage aflatoxin reduction increased with the treatment
time period. However, because of the concentrated solar radiation, even
the lowest treatment time decreased all the contaminated aflatoxins in
drastic amounts to a safe consumable level according to the European
Union standards.
These findings indicate that the method in the present study is
suitable for larger-scale production of decontaminated coconut oil.
Promising results achieved through this technique may warrant further
exploration of its use in treating contaminated materials. The effec­
tiveness of decontamination using this technique may vary depending
on the physical and chemical properties of the solid material, and thus,
further research is required to fully determine its efficacy.
4. Conclusion
The research study provided convincing results supporting the
effectiveness of concentrated solar radiation as a promising and feasible
method for reducing aflatoxin levels in edible coconut oil. The findings
indicate that treating the oil to a 10 min treatment (T-1) under a mean
concentrated solar radiation of 971 ± 29 (W/m2) effectively decreased
aflatoxin to safe levels. The use of concentrated solar radiation in this
study was unique and innovative, as it enabled the oil to be treated in a
relatively large volume in a short time frame. Notably, the study high­
lighted the importance of using a low exposure time coupled with high
aflatoxin elimination to preserve the quality characteristics of edible
coconut oil.
The treatment method demonstrated remarkable efficacy, in
removing aflatoxin, with elimination percentages of 90 % or higher in
all three treatment durations (10, 20, and 30 min). As a result, the

5
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

Fig. 2. Graphs depicting the instrumental analysis of Sample NU4 at various treatment stages: (A) Initial aflatoxin content, (B) Aflatoxin content after Treatment T-1
and (C) Aflatoxin content after Treatment T-(The y-axis has been subtly adjusted to present the area values in a manner that facilitates easy identification and
differentiation).

Table 3
Reduction percentages of total aflatoxin with each treatment.
Sample Initial T-1 T-2 T-3 % Reduction after T-1 % Reduction after T-2 % Reduction after T-3
(ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)

NU2 1.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 100 100 100

NU3 10.45 0.84 0.00 – 92 100 –

NU4 127.74 3.64 1.88 – 97 99 –

SU 12.99 1.05 0.00 – 92 100 –

SB1 14.20 2.40 0.97 0.00 83 93 100

SB2 88.68 0.06 0.00 – 100 100 –

6
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513

researchers concluded that the use of concentrated solar radiation is a interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
practical and efficient method for reducing aflatoxin in edible coconut the work reported in this paper.
oil.
Data availability
Authorship contributions
Data will be made available on request.
Conception and design of study was done by M.P.G. Vanniarachchy.
Acquisition of data, analysis and/or interpretation of data, drafting the
manuscript was done by B.V. Thimuthu Kasun. Revising the manuscript Acknowledgments
critically for important intellectual content and approval of the version
of the manuscript to be published was done by M.P.G. Vanniarachchy. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial

Appendix
Table A1
Concluded treatment dates and times.

Sample Treatment Time slots Temperature (◦ C)

Before treatment After treatment

NB (T-3) 10.00–10.30am 26 ± 2 52 ± 2
NU1 (T-3) 10.45–11.15am 26 ± 2 53 ± 2

NU2 (T-1) 11.10–11.20am 24 ± 2 48 ± 2

(T-2) 11.25–11.45am 24 ± 2 50 ± 2
(T-3) 11.50–12.20pm 24 ± 2 51 ± 2
NU3 (T-1) 10.40–10.50am 22 ± 2 45 ± 2
(T-2) 10.15–10.35am 22 ± 2 46 ± 2
NU4 (T-1) 11.25–11.35am 23 ± 2 43 ± 2
(T-2) 10.55–11.15am 24 ± 2 45 ± 2
SU (T-1) 01.08–01.18pm 24 ± 2 43 ± 2
(T-2) 12.45–01.05pm 25 ± 2 47 ± 2
SB1 (T-1) 12.36–12.46pm 24 ± 2 48 ± 2
(T-2) 01.05–01.25pm 24 ± 2 42 ± 2
(T-3) 12.02–12.32pm 24 ± 2 50 ± 2
SB2 (T-1) 01.40–01.45pm 25 ± 2 44 ± 2
(T-2) 01.20–01.30pm 25 ± 2 47 ± 2

Fig. A1. Proto-type solar radiator equipment.

References coconut oil: An overview. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 101(6),
2182–2193. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10870
El-Sayed, R. A., Jebur, A. B., Kang, W., & El-Demerdash, F. M. (2022). An overview on
Bordin, K., Sawada, M. M., Rodrigues, C. E., da, C., da Fonseca, C. R., & Oliveira, C. A. F.
the major mycotoxins in food products: Characteristics, toxicity, and analysis.
(2014). Incidence of aflatoxins in oil seeds and possible transfer to oil: A review.
Journal of Future Foods, 2(2), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfutfo.2022.03.002
Food Engineering Reviews, 6(1–2), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-014-
Fan, S., Zhang, F., Liu, S., Yu, C., Guan, D., & Pan, C. (2013). Removal of aflatoxin B1 in
9076-9
edible plant oils by oscillating treatment with alkaline electrolysed water. Food
Chen, C. F., Lin, C. H., Jan, H. T., & Yang, Y. L. (2009). Design of a solar concentrator
Chemistry, 141(3), 3118–3123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.06.013
combining paraboloidal and hyperbolic mirrors using ray tracing method. Optics
Gamage, T. V., Samarajeewa, U., de, S. G., & Arseculeratne, S. N. (1985). Non-toxicity to
Communications, 282(3), 360–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optcom.2008.10.017
ducklings of solar-irradiated coconut oil contaminated with aflatoxin. MIRCEN
Deen, A., Visvanathan, R., Wickramarachchi, D., Marikkar, N., Nammi, S.,
Journal of Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 1(3), 239–245. https://doi.org/
Jayawardana, B. C., et al. (2021). Chemical composition and health benefits of
10.1007/BF01742318

7
B.V. Thimuthu Kasun and M.P.G. Vanniarachchy
Gamlath, L., Siriwardana, T., & Sudasinghe, B. H. (2021). A baseline survey on food
safety hazards in commonly consumed food items in Sri-Lanka. Journal of the
National Science Foundation of Sri Lanka, 49(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.4038/
jnsfsr.v49i2.10007
Ghani, N. A. A., Channip, A. A., Chok Hwee Hwa, P., Ja’afar, F., Yasin, H. M., &
Usman, A. (2018). Physicochemical properties, antioxidant capacities, and metal
contents of virgin coconut oil produced by wet and dry processes. Food Science and
Nutrition, 6(5), 1298–1306. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.671
Hallstrom, H., & Thuvander, A. (1997). Toxicological evaluation of myristicin. Natural
Toxins, 5(5), 186–192. https://doi.org/10.1002/19970505nt3
Herzallah, S., Alshawabkeh, K., & Al Fataftah, A. (2008). Aflatoxin decontamination of
artificially contaminated feeds by sunlight, γ-radiation, and microwave heating.
Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 17(4), 515–521. https://doi.org/10.3382/
japr.2007-00107
Ismail, A., Gonçalves, B. L., de Neeff, D. V., Ponzilacqua, B., Coppa, C. F. S. C.,
Hintzsche, H., et al. (2018). Aflatoxin in foodstuffs: Occurrence and recent advances
in decontamination. Food Research International, 113, 74–85. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.foodres.2018.06.067
Javanmardi, F., Khodaei, D., Sheidaei, Z., Bashiry, M., Nayebzadeh, K., Vasseghian, Y.,
et al. (2022). Decontamination of aflatoxins in edible oils: A comprehensive review.
Food Reviews International, 38(7), 1410–1426. https://doi.org/10.1080/
87559129.2020.1812635
Kappally, S., Shirwaikar, A., & Shirwaikar, A. (2015). Coconut oil – a review of potential
applications. Hygeia: Journal for Drugs and Medicines, 7(2), 34–41. https://doi.org/
10.15254/H.J.D.Med.7.2015.149
Karunarathna, N. B., Fernando, C. J., Munasinghe, D. M. S., & Fernando, R. (2019).
Occurrence of aflatoxins in edible vegetable oils in Sri Lanka. Food Control, 101(97),
103.
Krothapalli, A., & Greska, B. (2012). Solar concentrators. Handbook of climate change
mitigation, 3 (June 2014), 1263–1294. 10.1007/978-1-4419-7991-9_33.
Market research report- coconut oil market size. (2022). In Fortune business insights.
Nguyen, T., Flint, S., & Palmer, J. (2020). Control of aflatoxin M1 in milk by novel
methods: A review. Food Chemistry, 311, Article 125984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodchem.2019.125984
Renné, D., George, R., Marion, B., Heimiller, D., & Gueymard, C. (2003). Solar resource
assessment for Sri Lanka and Maldives. 10.2172/15004299.
Food Chemistry Advances 3 (2023) 100513
Rustom, I. Y. S. (1997). Aflatoxin in food and feed: Occurrence, legislation and
inactivation by physical methods. Food Chemistry, 59(1), 57–67. https://doi.org/
10.1016/S0308-8146(96)00096-9
Samarajeewa, U. (1988). Solar degradation of aflatoxin B1 in foods (pp. 91–92).
Samarajeewa, U., Arseculeratne, S. N., & Bandunatha, C. H. S. R. (1977). Degradation of
aflatoxins in coconut oil and copra meal (poonac). Journal of the National Science
Council of Sri Lanka, 5(1), 1–12.
Samarajeewa, U., Jayatilaka, C. L. V., Ranjithan, A., et al. (1985). A pilot plant for
detoxification of aflatoxin B1-contaminated coconut oil by solar irradiation. World
Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, 1, 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF01553418
Sandupama, P., Munasinghe, D., & Jayasinghe, M. (2022). Coconut oil as a therapeutic
treatment for Alzheimer’s disease: A review. Journal of Future Foods, 2(1), 41–52.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfutfo.2022.03.016
Sipos, P., Peles, F., Brassó, D. L., Béri, B., Pusztahelyi, T., Pócsi, I., et al. (2021). Physical
and chemical methods for reduction in aflatoxin content of feed and food. Toxins, 13
(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/TOXINS13030204
Srivastava, Y., Semwal, A. D., & Majumdar, A. (2016). Quantitative and qualitative
analysis of bioactive components present in virgin coconut oil. Cogent Food and
Agriculture, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2016.1164929
Strosnider, H., Azziz-Baumgartner, E., Banziger, M., Bhat, R. V., Breiman, R.,
Brune, M. N., et al. (2006). Workgroup report: Public health strategies for reducing
aflatoxin exposure in developing countries. Environmental Health Perspectives, 114
(12), 1898–1903. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.9302
Wacoo, A. P., Wendiro, D., Nanyonga, S., Hawumba, J. F., Sybesma, W., & Kort, R.
(2018). Feasibility of a novel on-site detection method for aflatoxin in maize flour
from markets and selected households in Kampala, Uganda. Toxins, 10(327), 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.3390/toxins10080327
Wanniarachchi, P. C., Uthpala, T. G. G., & Ranaweera, K. K. D. S. (2023). Aflatoxin
occurrence, contamination, detection, and decontamination with special emphasis
on coconut oil: A review. Journal of Agricultural Sciences - Sri Lanka, 18(1), 101–128.
https://doi.org/10.4038/jas.v18i1.10101
Yitbarek, M., & Tamir, B. (2013). Mycotoxines and/or aflatoxines in milk and milk
products: Review. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology,
and Sciences, 4(1), 1–32.