Global grain production needs a significant increase in output in the coming decades in order to cover the food and feed consumption needs of mankind. As sustainability is the key factor in production, the authors investigate global grain production, the losses along the value chain, and future solutions. Global wheat, maize, rice, and soybean production peaked at 2.102 million tons (mt) of harvested grain in 2018. Pre-harvest losses due to diseases, animal pests, weeds, and abiotic stresses and harvest destroy yearly amount to about 35% of the total possible biological product of 3.153 mt, with 1051.5 mt being lost before harvest. The losses during harvest and storage through toxin contamination are responsible for 690 mt, with a total of 1.741 mt or 83% of the total newly stored grain. Limited cooperation can be experienced between scientific research, plant breeding, plant protection, agronomy, and society, and in addition, their interdependence is badly understood. Plant breeding can help to reduce a significant part of field loss up to 300 mt (diseases, toxins, water and heat stress) and up to 220 mt during storage (toxin contamination). The direct and indirect impact of pest management on production lead to huge grain losses. The main task is to reduce grain losses during production and storage and consumption. Better harvest and storage conditions could prevent losses of 420 mt. The education of farmers by adopting the vocational school system is a key issue in the prevention of grain loss. In addition, extension services should be created to demonstrate farmers crop management in practice. A 50% reduction of grain loss and waste along the value chain seems to be achievable for the feeding 3–4 billion more people in a sustainable way without raising genetic yields of crop cultivars.

Fungicide application is a key factor in the control of mycotoxin contamination in the harvested wheat grain. However, the practical results are often disappointing. In 2000–2004, 2006–2008 and 2007 and 2008, three experiments were made to test the efficacy of fungicide control on Fusarium Head Blight (FHB) in wheat and to find ways to improve control of the disease and toxin contamination. In a testing system we have used for 20 years, tebuconazole and tebuconazole + prothioconazole fungicides regularly reduced symptoms by about 80% with a correlating reduction in toxin contamination. Averages across the years normally show a correlation of r = 0.90 or higher. The stability differences (measured by the stability index) between the poorest and the best fungicides are about 10 or more times, differing slightly in mycotoxin accumulation, FHB index (severity) and Fusarium damaged kernels (FDK). The weak fungicides, like carbendazim, were effective only when no epidemic occurred or epidemic severity was at a very low level. Similar fungicide effects were seen on wheat cultivars which varied in FHB resistance. In this study, we found three fold differences in susceptibility to FHB between highly susceptible and moderately resistant cultivars when treated with fungicides. In the moderately resistant cultivars, about 50% of the fungicide treatments lowered the DON level below the regulatory limit. In the most susceptible cultivars, all fungicides failed to reduce mycotoxin levels low enough for grain acceptance, in spite of the fact that disease was significantly reduced. The results correlated well with the results of the large-scale field tests of fungicide application at the time of natural infection. The Turbo FloodJet nozzle reduced FHB incidence and DON contamination when compared to the TeeJet XR nozzle. Overall, the data suggest that significant decreases in FHB incidence and deoxynivalenol contamination in field situations are possible with proper fungicide applications. Additionally, small plot tests can be used to evaluate the quality of the field disease and toxin production.

Mycotoxins in small grains are a significant and long-standing problem. These contaminants may be produced by members of several fungal genera, including Alternaria, Aspergillus, Fusarium, Claviceps, and Penicillium. Interventions that limit contamination can be made both pre-harvest and post-harvest. Many problems and strategies to control them and the toxins they produce are similar regardless of the location at which they are employed, while others are more common in some areas than in others. Increased knowledge of host-plant resistance, better agronomic methods, improved fungicide management, and better storage strategies all have application on a global basis. We summarize the major pre- and post-harvest control strategies currently in use. In the area of pre-harvest, these include resistant host lines, fungicides and their application guided by epidemiological models, and multiple cultural practices. In the area of post-harvest, drying, storage, cleaning and sorting, and some end-product processes were the most important at the global level. We also employed the Nominal Group discussion technique to identify and prioritize potential steps forward and to reduce problems associated with human and animal consumption of these grains. Identifying existing and potentially novel mechanisms to effectively manage mycotoxin problems in these grains is essential to ensure the safety of humans and domesticated animals that consume these grains.

During the last decade, there have been many advances in research and technology that have greatly contributed to expanded capabilities and knowledge in detection and measurement, characterization, biosynthesis, and management of mycotoxins in maize. MycoKey, an EU‐funded Horizon 2020 project, was established to advance knowledge and technology transfer around the globe to address mycotoxin impacts in key food and feed chains. MycoKey included several working groups comprising international experts in different fields of mycotoxicology. The MycoKey Maize Working Group recently convened to gather information and strategize for the development and implementation of solutions to the maize mycotoxin problem in light of current and emerging technologies. This feature summarizes the Maize WG discussion and recommendations for addressing mycotoxin problems in maize. Discussions focused on aflatoxins, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins, and zearalenone, which are the most widespread and persistently important mycotoxins in maize. Although regional differences were recognized, there was consensus about many of the priorities for research and effective management strategies. For preharvest management, genetic resistance and selecting adapted maize genotypes, along with insect management, were among the most fruitful strategies identified across the mycotoxin groups. For postharvest management, the most important practices included timely harvest, rapid grain drying, grain cleaning, and carefully managed storage conditions. Remediation practices such as optical sorting, density separation, milling, and chemical detoxification were also suggested. Future research and communication priorities included advanced breeding technologies, development of risk assessment tools, and the development and dissemination of regionally relevant management guidelines.

Fusarium head blight has posed continuous risks to wheat production worldwide due to its effects on yield, and the fungus provides additional risks with production of toxins. Plant resistance is thought to be the most powerful method. The host plant resistance is complex, Types I–V were reported. From the time of spraying inoculation (Type I), all resistance types can be identified and used to determine the total resistance. Type II resistance (at point inoculation) describes the spread of head blight from the ovary to the other parts of the head. Therefore, it cannot solve the resistance problem alone. Type II QTL (quantitative trait locus) Fhb1 on 3BS from Sumai 3 descendant CM82036 secures about the same resistance level as Type I QTL does on 5AS and 5ASc in terms of visual symptoms, FDK (Fusarium damaged kernel), and deoxynivalenol response. Recently, increasing evidence supports the association of deoxynivalenol (DON) content and low kernel infection with FHB (Fusarium head blight) resistance (Types III and IV), as QTL for individual resistance types has been identified. In plant breeding practice, the role of visual selection remains vital, but the higher correlations for FDK/DON make it possible to select low-DON genotypes via FDK value. For phenotyping, the use of more independent inocula (isolates or mixtures) makes resistance evaluation more reliable. The large heterogeneity of the mapping populations is a serious source of underestimating genetic effects. Therefore, the increasing of homogeneity is a necessity. As no wheat varieties exist with full resistance to FHB, crops must be supported by proper agronomy and fungicide use.