A study of carry-over and histopathological effects after chronic dietary intake of citrinin in pigs, broiler chickens and laying hens

Citrinin (CIT) is a polyketide mycotoxin occurring in a variety of food and feedstuff, among which cereal grains are the most important contaminated source. Pigs and poultry are important livestock animals frequently exposed to mycotoxins, including CIT. Concerns are rising related to the toxic, and especially the potential nephrotoxic, properties of CIT. The purpose of this study was to clarify the histopathological effects on kidneys, liver, jejunum and duodenum of pigs, broiler chickens and laying hens receiving CIT contaminated feed. During 3 weeks, pigs (n = 16) were exposed to feed containing 1 mg CIT/kg feed or to control feed (n = 4), while 2 groups of broiler chickens and laying hens (n = 8 per group) received 0.1 mg CIT/kg feed (lower dose group) and 3 or 3.5 mg CIT/kg feed (higher dose group), respectively, or control feed (n = 4). CIT concentrations were quantified in plasma, kidneys, liver, muscle and eggs using a validated ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) method. Kidneys, liver, duodenum and jejunum were evaluated histologically using light microscopy, while the kidneys were further examined using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Histopathology did not reveal major abnormalities at the given contamination levels. However, a significant increase of swollen and degenerated mitochondria in renal cortical cells from all test groups were observed (p < 0.05). These observations could be related to oxidative stress, which is the major mechanism of CIT toxicity. Residues of CIT were detected in all collected tissues, except for muscle and egg white from layers in the lowest dose group, and egg white from layers in the highest dose group. CIT concentrations in plasma ranged between 0.1 (laying hens in lower dose group) and 20.8 ng/mL (pigs). In tissues, CIT concentrations ranged from 0.6 (muscle) to 20.3 µg/kg (liver) in pigs, while concentrations in chickens ranged from 0.1 (muscle) to 70.2 µg/kg (liver). Carry-over ratios from feed to edible tissues were between 0.1 and 2% in pigs, and between 0.1 and 6.9% in chickens, suggesting a low contribution of pig and poultry tissue-derived products towards the total dietary CIT intake for humans

Corporate performance and CEO dismissal:The role of social category faultlines

Research Question/Issue This study investigates the moderating role of social category faultlines in the relationship between firm performance and CEO dismissal. We also examine how two board contingencies—the presence of board evaluation and the number of board committees—affect how social category faultlines moderate the performance–CEO dismissal relationship. Research Findings/Insights Using panel data on Belgian listed firms covering 2006 to 2014, we find that the negative relationship between firm performance and the likelihood of CEO dismissal is significantly weaker when boards experience social category faultlines. Further investigation of board contingencies demonstrates that social category faultlines have a stronger influence on the performance–CEO dismissal relationship when the board does not engage in board evaluation or has greater numbers of board committees. Theoretical/Academic Implications This study builds on the social identity perspective by providing empirical support for social category faultlines within the context of boards of directors. Social category faultlines lead to identity-based subgroups within the board, which reduce directors' identification with the board as a whole, ultimately impacting the board's capability to dismiss a poorly performing CEO. Moreover, our study demonstrates how board contingencies can promote and/or weaken directors' identification with the board, which affects the salience of identity-based subgroups. Practitioner/Policy Implications This study offers insights for practitioners interested in improving board effectiveness. Our evidence implies that decisions concerning the appointment of directors should be based on criteria that take faultlines and subgroups into account. Furthermore, our findings highlight the importance of strengthening the superordinate board identity by implementing initiatives such as board evaluation

Family Owner-Nonfamily CEO Relational Practices Shaping CEO Succession:Handling Equivocality and Relational Balancing

This study focuses on family owner–nonfamily CEO relational practices and what these relational practices constrain and potentiate in family firm CEO succession. Our main contribution is developing a constructionist relational practice perspective and approach as an alternative to the entitative view that dominates the family business literature. We illustrate the relational practice perspective through our dialogically structured inquiries with family owners and nonfamily CEOs. We co-develop practical wisdom on how family owner–nonfamily CEO relational practices can construct stuckness in organizing or, conversely, open up new possibilities to go on depending on (i) the way the family owner and nonfamily CEO “handle” equivocality and tension they continuously (re)produce through their relational practices and (ii) the way they enact “relational balancing” to equilibrate their relation in the making in terms of value/self-worth maintenance by involving other actors, such as board members, management team members, or a coach

CEO Personality: A Different Perspective on the Nonfamily Versus Family CEO Debate

Based on a unique, hand-collected data set, we examine the personality traits of nonfamily and family CEOs in privately held Belgian family firms using the Occupational Personality Questionnaire. We find significant differences between nonfamily and family CEOs with regard to nine personality traits: independent minded, democratic, data rational, behavioral, detail conscious, conscientious, relaxed, worrying, and trusting. The findings suggest a very balanced personality profile for nonfamily CEOs and a rather strong-willed personality for family CEOs. Moreover, while the results suggest that the personalities of nonfamily CEOs matter for firm performance, no such indications were revealed for family CEOs