“AI is valuable tool in a complex toolbox”
Prof. Chris Elliot and Prof. Rudolf Krska are general conference chairs at this year’s World Mycotoxin Forum held in Salzburg, Austria. In this interview they share their thoughts on what artificial intelligence (AI) means for the feed and food industry, how important it is to stimulate and encourage the next generation of mycotoxin researchers and what we can expect from the 15th WMF conference.
MYCOTOXINS 2025: Utilising technology to detect & mitigate – read all articles
Chris: “We hear a lot about AI-sometimes it’s positive stories, other times negative. I think many people, including me, don’t fully understand the full potential of AI, as well as the risks involved. If we think specifically around mycotoxins, what I think is very much what we can describe as predictive analytics, by analysing large datasets we can identify trends in where mycotoxins are occurring, and which ones are being detected. AI can also help predict future patterns, enabling us to make more informed decisions. With this information, we can develop more targeted strategies for mitigating risks, whether that means harvesting earlier, using agrochemicals, or taking other preventive measures. Ultimately, for me, it’s about making better decisions to control mycotoxins.”
Rudolf: “I agree with Chris, I’d also like to highlight 3 key topics that are closely related; big data, digitalisation and machine learning AI. It’s important to remember that AI is only as effective as the data we feed it – data is the foundation. AI is certainly going to assist us in the future in making better decisions. This year’s World Mycotoxin Forum focuses heavily on data because we need better forecasting, and more accurate early warning systems. The idea that ‘whoever owns the data, owns the world’ is especially relevant when it comes to mycotoxin data. We know that up to 80% of all agricultural and food commodities are contaminated with mycotoxins, it’s critical that we all have access to this data. We need to use it to improve exposure and risk assessments. Alongside that, digitalisation strategies are key – especially in terms of risk assessment and management strategies. This also ties into advancements in detection technologies, where data, digitalisation, and AI all intersect.”
Chris: “I think there is a belief that AI will be the solution to everything, and while it will certainly be a valuable tool in the future, it will be just one part of a much more complex toolbox. But can we trust the results AI provides? I did a simple test by asking the same question to an AI platform in three different ways, and got 3 completely different answers. This shows that we need to be cautious, as AI results aren’t always as accurate as we might think. There is also concern around privacy and confidentiality. I’m involved in several projects focusing on governance systems for big data and AI, because if people don’t trust the system, they won’t contribute their data. The less data we have, the less accurate the models will be leading to more mistakes. Governance of data management is important. This will also be discussed during the WMF.”
Rudolf: “Validation is also crucial when it comes to AI. We need to ensure that the results we get from AI are reliable. This process must be carefully validated because we know that multiple AI systems will exist, developed by different companies and governments, each potentially reaching different conclusions. Validation relies on solid analytical data, mathematical models, and machine learning algorithms, all of which need to be cross-checked and validated across countries and research groups. It’s also vital to foster collaboration between bioinformaticians and mycotoxin researchers, as their interaction plays a key role in ensuring accurate and effective results.”
Chris: “Ethically, AI must benefit everyone who provides information, and they should see the results of their contribution. It shouldn’t harm individuals, businesses or even countries. For example, if AI modelling predicts a mycotoxin disaster in northern Bangladesh, it could lead to halting food imports from that region. It’s not just about the data itself, but also how it’s interpreted and the potential consequences that follow.”
Rudolf: “This ongoing ethical dilemma between the Global South and the developed world can lead to significant economic damage based on inaccurate AI conclusions. There’s also a moral issue, particularly in food safety. When it comes to mycotoxins, which are still mostly a feed-related concern, it’s both an economic and a responsibility issue for food and feed companies and they don’t want any surprises, like the presence of non-regulated mycotoxins even in low levels where they do not pose any risk. In the western world, minimum levels of food contaminants are often seen not only as a responsibility but even as a marketing issue, while in the Global South, this can be a matter of survival. For instance, we might issue yellow alerts for commodities with low levels of contamination, maybe just 10 or 20% above the tolerable daily limits. But in many places like sub- Saharan Africa, they would be grateful to have maize available, even if it’s contaminated above regulatory levels established in Europe.”
Rudolf: “The lessons learned are primarily driven by the researchers who come up with innovative solutions. However, we must not forget that the industry plays a major role, not only for content, but also in research achievements which significantly impact the novel editions of the World Mycotoxin Forum. The lessons are also guided by Helena Bastiaanse (from the organising committee), supported by the Advisory Board and by Chris and I as conference chairs. The response to the 5 lessons learned, which we always publish, has been incredible. There is a strong demand from the entire community involved in food and feed safety for these insights. I feel that we have made a real impact with them. People are eager to understand what the future holds for the feed and food industry based on what researchers are saying and what we have concluded over the past 25 years. AI will play a role in this year’s 5 lessons learned, but to which extent and how we incorporate it will be a surprise. All will be revealed on the last day.”
Chris: “The reason we all attend conferences, congresses is to hear about cutting- edge research, build relationships, network and partnerships. People will take different things away from the meetings, that’s for sure. I think one of the main benefits of compiling and publishing the 5 lessons learned at the end of forum is that it reaches people who couldn’t attend. It provides valuable insights into what was discussed at the congress and highlights the key topics. These lessons are especially popular with people from the developing world who struggle to attend the conference. I just think it’s a wonderful way of disseminating knowledge not only to those present at the congress but also with mycotoxin researchers worldwide. As far as I know, this approach is quite unique to the World Mycotoxin Forum.”
Chris: “In science and technology, we’re always working to promote the field, recruit young people, and make it both interesting and exciting. We want them to feel they are contributing to something on a global scale. One of the big challenges today is that, while students once went to university to get a better job, many now attend because they want to learn how they can help solve global problems, which I think is fantastic. We need to keep conveying to young people that this is an important, cool field of science. The fact that we’re discussing artificial intelligence now will connect with them more than, say, talking about time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Social media plays a huge role in this as well. What we’re aiming to do at the World Mycotoxin Forum is to show that we understand where things are headed and that we want to bring in young people with new ideas and skills to push the research forward. Ultimately, we aim to make a high-level impact that the field truly requires.”
Rudolf: “The mycotoxin research field is highly motivating because it’s incredibly interdisciplinary. It brings together experts from a wide range of areas, including food and feed safety, chemistry, plant pathology, fungal taxonomy, veterinary medicine, human medicine, food science, food chemistry, and processing technology—plus, we can’t forget toxicology. While the community has grown to include around 20,000 authors, it’s still small enough to feel like a family. At the forum, we have poster awards which are given to young scientists. This year we are also introducing the Naresh Magan Lecture Award in honour of Naresh, a well-respected colleague from Cranfield University (UK) who passed away too soon. The prize will be awarded at the WMF to an early-career scientist. Additionally, we aim to encourage and support young people by providing financial resources for mycotoxin research through doctoral networks. Chris and I are involved in one such network, which is coordinated by my institute in Vienna, which is called BIOTOXDoc. It focuses on biotoxins in food, mycotoxin prevention, toxicology, and related issues. We also offer young scientists opportunities to participate during conferences like the Mycotoxin Forum, which serves as a great motivator. There’s a lot we’re doing to engage and support the next generation of researchers, and the community is definitely growing.”
Join 13,000+ subscribers
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay updated about all the need-to-know content in the dairy sector, two times a week.
