*5.5. Consumer Waste*

Plate waste of food is as high as 5–20%. In developing countries, FL and FW including plate waste is higher than in developed countries. FL and FW depend on technology and on consumer behavior. 1.3 billion tons of food or 1/3 of all food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted from harvest to consumption annually, without accounting for losses in livestock production worldwide [11,74]. Carrying out evidence-based FL and FW calculations still presents an open challenge. In estimating FW, the most critical research gap is related to the lack of a clear definition of FW and a harmonized FW accounting methodology [75]. In developed countries, consumers throw away 286 mt of cereal products [76]. Just taking into consideration maize, wheat, and rice, at least 200 mt of cereals are wasted by consumers per annum globally (soybean loss and waste is not included).

### *5.6. Breeding Versus Food Losses*

Research has clarified that resistance is the most important toxin regulator [61,62,65,77,78]. However, large resistance di fferences occur, in wheat Fusarium head blight deoxynivalenol concentration varied between 5 mg/kg and 400 mg/kg at the higher epidemic pressure in 2001–2002 [78]. According to literature sources there is no e ffective means for solving toxin contamination before harvest Jans et al. [79] stressing the preharvest prevention of disease and toxin by resistance. This is a problem as this also inhibits breeding activity and creates di fficulties for stakeholders. The results of the wide international literature do not support this view. Ten- to 20-fold resistance di fferences also exist in toxin response; therefore, this problem should be exploited.

Resistance also influences further fungicide e fficiency and improves the predisposition of plants to previous crops with high pathogen population [80]. Disease and toxin forecasts will be better when resistance levels are considered [81]. Zorn et al. [82] indicated that ploughing was as e ffective a way to reduce deoxynivalenol (DON) as planting a more resistant variety, and in other diseases the experiences are similar. Breeding for adaptation to di fferent soil and climatic conditions is essential. Tolerance to acidic soils is also a breeding problem among many others. Minimum tillage and organic production needs plants that are highly resistant against the most important diseases, as in these cases the disease pressure can be significantly higher as e ffective fungicide are forbidden to use. Resistance to biotic and abiotic factors brings a direct and significant improvement to yield, quality stability and adaptation. Breeding for more e fficient fertilizer use in order to improve the photosynthetic activity, adaptation etc. of the plants has also its place. The main problem is that the extensive knowledge available in the scientific community su ffers from a bottleneck e ffect when it should be applied in plant breeding. Most breeding firms are small, with 1–2 breeders for a plant or less, and they lack any laboratory background or support from trained scientists. This is true also for European family companies. The large firms concentrate on high yields but often neglect food safety and other problems, so varieties with high yields often produce severe financial losses.

Unsatisfactory breeding e fforts contribute to 210 mt loss due to toxin contaminated grains. Much of the storage microbes are of field origin, so lack of resistance might be partly responsible for storage losses. The devastating e ffect of storage microbes is characteristic when storage conditions are bad, however, most of the losses could be prevented by advanced storage technology. Storage microbes cause about 50% of storage loss, i.e. 210 million mt of grain per annum; therefore, mycotoxins of field and storage origin are treated separately because they need to be treated using di fferent approaches.
