They say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” For many feed mills, when a procedure works, repeating it makes sense. But mycotoxin testing is one area where doing exactly what you did last year may not be the best approach.
The 2026 growing season provides a perfect example. In a September webinar, Dr. Jan Dutton, CEO of CropProphet, said corn-producing regions experienced a generally wetter-than-normal summer, but a drier, warmer period emerged in mid-July that lasted until the end of the month. That stretch coincided with corn silking, an important period for aflatoxin risk.
Because corn doesn’t reach the same developmental stage simultaneously everywhere, Dutton combined U.S. Department of Agriculture silking data with county-level weather information to evaluate conditions associated with aflatoxin risk. His analysis, accounting for differences in silking progress from state to state, revealed that the conditions increased potential aflatoxin risk in areas reaching farther north than typical.
The example illustrates a new threat for one region, but the broader message is that mills everywhere should test smarter for mycotoxins — with a risk-based program that considers high-inclusion and high-risk ingredients, historical testing results, third-party information and what current results reveal about incoming grain.
A mill might begin harvest testing for multiple toxins to understand the new crop’s risk profile. As data accumulate, testing can be adjusted based on actual results, suppliers and geography. Testing frequency and mitigant use can also change as trends emerge.
This approach turns testing from a static procedure into a feedback loop. It also factors in that multiple mycotoxins commonly occur together, so concentrating too narrowly on one toxin can leave part of the risk unseen.
A testing plan still needs consistency in sampling procedures, operator protocols and corrective actions, but consistency isn’t the same as complacency. The goal shouldn’t be to run the same mycotoxin program every harvest. It should be to have a program disciplined enough to stay consistent where it matters — and flexible enough to respond when the crop tells you something has changed.
