Predicting spread and effective control measures for African swine fever-Should we blame the boars?

An ongoing, continually spreading, outbreak of African swine fever (ASF), following its identification in Georgia in 2007, has resulted in 17 European and 12 Asian countries reporting cases by April 2020, with cases occurring in both wild boar and domestic pigs. Curtailing further spread of ASF requires understanding of the transmission pathways of the disease. ASF is self-sustaining in the wild boar population, and they have been implicated as one of the main drivers of transmission within Europe. We developed a spatially explicit model to estimate the risk of infection with ASF in wild boar and pigs due to natural movement of wild boar that is applicable across the whole of Europe. We demonstrate the model by using it to predict the probability that early cases of ASF in Poland were caused by wild boar dispersion. The risk of infection in 2015 is computed due to wild boar cases in Poland in 2014, compared against reported cases in 2015, and then the procedure is repeated for 2015-2016. We find that long- and medium-distance spread of ASF (i.e. >30 km) is unlikely to have occurred due to wild boar dispersal, due in part to the generally short distances wild boar will travel (<20 km on average). We also predict the relative success of different control strategies in 2015, if they were implemented in 2014. Results suggest that hunting of wild boar reduces the number of new cases, but a larger region is at risk of ASF compared with no control measure. Alternatively, introducing wild boar-proof fencing reduces the size of the region at risk in 2015, but not the total number of cases. Overall, our model suggests wild boar movement is only responsible for local transmission of disease; thus, other pathways are more dominant in medium- and long-distance spread of the disease.

Cross-Validation of Generic Risk Assessment Tools for Animal Disease Incursion Based on a Case Study for African Swine Fever.

In recent years, several generic risk assessment (RA) tools have been developed that can be applied to assess the incursion risk of multiple infectious animal diseases allowing for a rapid response to a variety of newly emerging or re-emerging diseases. Although these tools were originally developed for different purposes, they can be used to answer similar or even identical risk questions. To explore the opportunities for cross-validation, seven generic RA tools were used to assess the incursion risk of African swine fever (ASF) to the Netherlands and Finland for the 2017 situation and for two hypothetical scenarios in which ASF cases were reported in wild boar and/or domestic pigs in Germany. The generic tools ranged from qualitative risk assessment tools to stochastic spatial risk models but were all parameterized using the same global databases for disease occurrence and trade in live animals and animal products. A comparison of absolute results was not possible, because output parameters represented different endpoints, varied from qualitative probability levels to quantitative numbers, and were expressed in different units. Therefore, relative risks across countries and scenarios were calculated for each tool, for the three pathways most in common (trade in live animals, trade in animal products, and wild boar movements) and compared. For the 2017 situation, all tools evaluated the risk to the Netherlands to be higher than Finland for the live animal trade pathway, the risk to Finland the same or higher as the Netherlands for the wild boar pathway, while the tools were inconclusive on the animal products pathway. All tools agreed that the hypothetical presence of ASF in Germany increased the risk to the Netherlands, but not to Finland. The ultimate aim of generic RA tools is to provide risk-based evidence to support risk managers in making informed decisions to mitigate the incursion risk of infectious animal diseases. The case study illustrated that conclusions on the ASF risk were similar across the generic RA tools, despite differences observed in calculated risks. Hence, it was concluded that the cross-validation contributed to the credibility of their results.

Risk assessments for quality-assured, source-segregated composts and anaerobic digestates for a circular bioeconomy in the UK.

A circular economy relies on demonstrating the quality and environmental safety of wastes that are recovered and reused as products. Policy-level risk assessments, using generalised exposure scenarios, and informed by stakeholder communities have been used to appraise the acceptability of necessary changes to legislation, allowing wastes to be valued, reused and marketed. Through an extensive risk assessment exercise, summarised in this paper, we explore the burden of proof required to offer safety assurance to consumer and brand-sensitive food sectors in light of attempts to declassify, as wastes, quality-assured, source-segregated compost and anaerobic digestate products in the United Kingdom. We report the residual microbiological and chemical risks estimated for both products in land application scenarios and discuss these in the context of an emerging UK bioeconomy worth £52bn per annum. Using plausible worst case assumptions, as demanded by the quality food sector, risk estimates and hazard quotients were estimated to be low or negligible. For example, the human health risk of E. coli 0157 illness from exposure to microbial residuals in quality-assured composts, through a ready-to-eat vegetable consumption exposure route, was estimated at ~10-8 per person per annum. For anaerobic digestion residues, 7 × 10-3cases of E. coli 0157 were estimated per annum, a potential contribution of 0.0007% of total UK cases. Hazard quotients for potential chemical contaminants in both products were insufficient in magnitude to merit detailed quantitative risk assessments. Stakeholder engagement and expert review was also a substantive feature of this study. We conclude that quality-assured, source-segregated products applied to land, under UK quality protocols and waste processing standards, pose negligible risks to human, animal, environmental and crop receptors, providing that risk management controls set within the standards and protocols are adhered to.

A generic framework for spatial quantitative risk assessments of infectious diseases: Lumpy skin disease case study.

The increase in availability of spatial data and the technological advances to handle such data allow for subsequent improvements in our ability to assess risk in a spatial setting. We provide a generic framework for quantitative risk assessments of disease introduction that capitalizes on these new data. It can be adopted across multiple spatial scales, for any pathogen, method of transmission or location. The framework incorporates the risk of initial infection in a previously uninfected location due to registered movement (e.g., trade) and unregistered movement (e.g., daily movements of wild animals). We discuss the steps of the framework and the data required to compute it. We then outline how this framework is applied for a single pathway using lumpy skin disease as a case study, a disease which had an outbreak in the Balkans in 2016. We calculate the risk of initial infection for the rest of Europe in 2016 due to trade. We perform the risk assessment on 3 spatial scales-countries, regions within countries and individual farms. We find that Croatia (assuming no vaccination occurred) has the highest mean probability of infection, with Italy, Hungary and Spain following. Including import detection of infected trade does reduce risk but this reduction is proportionally lower for countries with highest risk. The risk assessment results are consistent across the spatial scales, while in addition, at the finer spatial scales, it highlights specific areas or individual locations of countries on which to focus surveillance.

The Risk of Infection by African Swine Fever Virus in European Swine Through Boar Movement and Legal Trade of Pigs and Pig Meat.

African swine fever (ASF) is currently spreading westwards throughout Europe and eastwards into China, with cases occurring in both wild boar and domestic pigs. A generic risk assessment framework is used to determine the probability of first infection with ASF virus (ASFV) at a fine spatial scale across European Union Member States. The framework aims to assist risk managers across Europe with their ASF surveillance and intervention activities. Performing the risk assessment at a fine spatial scale allows for hot-spot surveillance, which can aid risk managers by directing surveillance or intervention resources at those areas or pathways deemed most at risk, and hence enables prioritization of limited resources. We use 2018 cases of ASF to estimate prevalence of the disease in both wild boar and pig populations and compute the risk of initial infection for 2019 at a 100 km2 cell resolution via three potential pathways: legal trade in live pigs, natural movement of wild boar, and legal trade in pig meat products. We consider the number of pigs, boar and amount of pig meat entering our area of interest, the prevalence of the disease in the origin country, the probability of exposure of susceptible pigs or boar in the area of interest to introduced infected pigs, boar, or meat from an infected pig, and the probability of transmission to susceptible animals. We provide maps across Europe indicating regions at highest risk of initial infection. Results indicate that the risk of ASF in 2019 was predominantly focused on those regions which already had numerous cases in 2018 (Poland, Lithuania, Hungary, Romania, and Latvia). The riskiest pathway for ASFV transmission to pigs was the movement of wild boar for Eastern European countries and legal trade of pigs for Western European countries. New infections are more likely to occur in wild boar rather than pigs, for both the pig meat and wild boar movement pathways. Our results provide an opportunity to focus surveillance activities and thus increase our ability to detect ASF introductions earlier, a necessary requirement if we are to successfully control the spread of this devastating disease for the pig industry.

Salmonella control in poultry flocks and its public health impact.

An increase in confirmed human salmonellosis cases in the EU after 2014 triggered investigation of contributory factors and control options in poultry production. Reconsideration of the five current target serovars for breeding hens showed that there is justification for retaining Salmonella Enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium (including monophasic variants) and Salmonella Infantis, while Salmonella Virchow and Salmonella Hadar could be replaced by Salmonella Kentucky and either Salmonella Heidelberg, Salmonella Thompson or a variable serovar in national prevalence targets. However, a target that incorporates all serovars is expected to be more effective as the most relevant serovars in breeding flocks vary between Member State (MS) and over time. Achievement of a 1% target for the current target serovars in laying hen flocks is estimated to be reduced by 254,400 CrI95[98,540; 602,700] compared to the situation in 2016. This translates to a reduction of 53.4% CrI95[39.1; 65.7] considering the layer-associated human salmonellosis true cases and 6.2% considering the overall human salmonellosis true cases in the 23 MSs included in attribution modelling. A review of risk factors for Salmonella in laying hens revealed that overall evidence points to a lower occurrence in non-cage compared to cage systems. A conclusion on the effect of outdoor access or impact of the shift from conventional to enriched cages could not be reached. A similar review for broiler chickens concluded that the evidence that outdoor access affects the occurrence of Salmonella is inconclusive. There is conclusive evidence that an increased stocking density, larger farms and stress result in increased occurrence, persistence and spread of Salmonella in laying hen flocks. Based on scientific evidence, an impact of Salmonella control programmes, apart from general hygiene procedures, on the prevalence of Campylobacter in broiler flocks at the holding and on broiler meat at the end of the slaughter process is not expected.

Listeria monocytogenes contamination of ready-to-eat foods and the risk for human health in the EU.

Food safety criteria for Listeria monocytogenes in ready-to-eat (RTE) foods have been applied from 2006 onwards (Commission Regulation (EC) 2073/2005). Still, human invasive listeriosis was reported to increase over the period 2009-2013 in the European Union and European Economic Area (EU/EEA). Time series analysis for the 2008-2015 period in the EU/EEA indicated an increasing trend of the monthly notified incidence rate of confirmed human invasive listeriosis of the over 75 age groups and female age group between 25 and 44 years old (probably related to pregnancies). A conceptual model was used to identify factors in the food chain as potential drivers for L. monocytogenes contamination of RTE foods and listeriosis. Factors were related to the host (i. population size of the elderly and/or susceptible people; ii. underlying condition rate), the food (iii. L. monocytogenes prevalence in RTE food at retail; iv. L. monocytogenes concentration in RTE food at retail; v. storage conditions after retail; vi. consumption), the national surveillance systems (vii. improved surveillance), and/or the bacterium (viii. virulence). Factors considered likely to be responsible for the increasing trend in cases are the increased population size of the elderly and susceptible population except for the 25-44 female age group. For the increased incidence rates and cases, the likely factor is the increased proportion of susceptible persons in the age groups over 45 years old for both genders. Quantitative modelling suggests that more than 90% of invasive listeriosis is caused by ingestion of RTE food containing > 2,000 colony forming units (CFU)/g, and that one-third of cases are due to growth in the consumer phase. Awareness should be increased among stakeholders, especially in relation to susceptible risk groups. Innovative methodologies including whole genome sequencing (WGS) for strain identification and monitoring of trends are recommended.

Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 7: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2017.

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) concept was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's scientific Panels. The identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance of valid taxonomic units were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit are, where possible and reasonable in number, considered to be 'qualifications' which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's scientific Panels. No new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS taxonomic units and their qualifications. The BIOHAZ Panel confirms that the QPS approach can be extended to a genetically modified production strain if the recipient strain qualifies for the QPS status, and if the genetic modification does not indicate a concern. Between April and September 2017, the QPS notification list was updated with 46 applications for market authorisation. From these, 14 biological agents already had QPS status and 16 were not included as they are filamentous fungi or enterococci. One notification of Streptomyces K-61 (notified as former S. griseoviridis) and four of Escherichia coli were not considered for the assessment as they belong to taxonomic units that were excluded from further evaluations within the current QPS mandate. Eight notifications of Bacillus thuringiensis and one of an oomycete are pending the reception of the complete application. Two taxonomic units were evaluated: Kitasatospora paracochleata, which had not been evaluated before, and Komagataella phaffii, previously notified as Pichia pastoris included due to a change in the taxonomic identity. Kitasatospora paracochleata cannot be granted QPS status due to lack of information on its biology and to its possible production of toxic secondary metabolites. The species Komagataella phaffii can be recommended for the QPS list when used for enzyme production.

Scientific opinion on chronic wasting disease (II).

The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific opinion on chronic wasting disease in two parts. Part one, on surveillance, animal health risk-based measures and public health risks, was published in January 2017. This opinion (part two) addresses the remaining Terms of Reference, namely, 'are the conclusions and recommendations in the EFSA opinion of June 2004 on diagnostic methods for chronic wasting disease still valid? If not, an update should be provided', and 'update the conclusions of the 2010 EFSA opinion on the results of the European Union survey on chronic wasting disease in cervids, as regards its occurrence in the cervid population in the European Union'. Data on the performance of authorised rapid tests in North America are not comprehensive, and are more limited than those available for the tests approved for statutory transmissible spongiform encephalopathies surveillance applications in cattle and sheep. There are no data directly comparing available rapid test performances in cervids. The experience in Norway shows that the Bio-Rad TeSeE™ SAP test, immunohistochemistry and western blotting have detected reindeer, moose and red deer cases. It was shown that testing both brainstem and lymphoid tissue from each animal increases the surveillance sensitivity. Shortcomings in the previous EU survey limited the reliability of inferences that could be made about the potential disease occurrence in Europe. Subsequently, testing activity in Europe was low, until the detection of the disease in Norway, triggering substantial testing efforts in that country. Available data neither support nor refute the conclusion that chronic wasting disease does not occur widely in the EU and do not preclude the possibility that the disease was present in Europe before the survey was conducted. It appears plausible that chronic wasting disease could have become established in Norway more than a decade ago.

Evaluation of the application for a new alternative processing method for animal by-products of Category 3 material (ChainCraft B.V.).

EFSA received an application from the Dutch Competent Authority, under Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, for the evaluation of an alternative method for treatment of Category 3 animal by-products (ABP). It consists of the hydrolysis of the material to short-carbon chains, resulting in medium-chain fatty acids that may contain up to 1% hydrolysed protein, for use in animal feed. A physical process, with ultrafiltration followed by nanofiltration to remove hazards, is also used. Process efficacy has been evaluated based on the ability of the membrane barriers to retain potential biological hazards present. Small viruses passing the ultrafiltration membrane will be retained at the nanofiltration step, which represents a Critical Control Point (CCP) in the process. This step requires the Applicant to validate and provide certification for the specific use of the nanofiltration membranes used. Continuous monitoring and membrane integrity tests should be included as control measures in the HACCP plan. The ultrafiltration and nanofiltration techniques are able to remove particles of the size of virus, bacteria and parasites from liquids. If used under controlled and appropriate conditions, the processing methods proposed should reduce the risk in the end product to a degree which is at least equivalent to that achieved with the processing standards laid down in the Regulation for Category 3 material. The possible presence of small bacterial toxins produced during the fermentation steps cannot be avoided by the nanofiltration step and this hazard should be controlled by a CCP elsewhere in the process. The limitations specified in the current legislation and any future modifications in relation to the end use of the product also apply to this alternative process, and no hydrolysed protein of ruminant origin (except ruminant hides and skins) can be included in feed for farmed animals or for aquaculture.

Updated quantitative risk assessment (QRA) of the BSE risk posed by processed animal protein (PAP).

EFSA was requested: to assess the impact of a proposed quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) 'technical zero' on the limit of detection of official controls for constituents of ruminant origin in feed, to review and update the 2011 QRA, and to estimate the cattle bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) risk posed by the contamination of feed with BSE-infected bovine-derived processed animal protein (PAP), should pig PAP be re-authorised in poultry feed and vice versa, using both light microscopy and ruminant qPCR methods, and action limits of 100, 150, 200, 250 and 300 DNA copies. The current qPCR cannot discriminate between legitimately added bovine material and unauthorised contamination, or determine if any detected ruminant material is associated with BSE infectivity. The sensitivity of the surveillance for the detection of material of ruminant origin in feed is currently limited due to the heterogeneous distribution of the material, practicalities of sampling and test performance. A 'technical zero' will further reduce it. The updated model estimated a total BSE infectivity four times lower than that estimated in 2011, with less than one new case of BSE expected to arise each year. In the hypothetical scenario of a whole carcass of an infected cow entering the feed chain without any removal of specified risk material (SRM) or reduction of BSE infectivity via rendering, up to four new cases of BSE could be expected at the upper 95th percentile. A second model estimated that at least half of the feed containing material of ruminant origin will not be detected or removed from the feed chain, if an interpretation cut-off point of 100 DNA copies or more is applied. If the probability of a contaminated feed sample increased to 5%, with an interpretation cut-off point of 300 DNA copies, there would be a fourfold increase in the proportion of all produced feed that is contaminated but not detected.

Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 8: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2018.

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation procedure to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance of valid taxonomic units were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected by 'qualifications' which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's Scientific Panels. During the current assessment, no new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS taxonomic units and their qualifications. The Panel clarified that the qualification 'for production purpose only' implies the absence of viable cells of the production organism in the final product and can also be applied for food and feed products based on microbial biomass. Between September 2017 and March 2018, the QPS notification list was updated with 46 microorganisms from applications for market authorisation. From these, 28 biological agents already had QPS status, 15 were excluded of the QPS exercise from the previous QPS mandate (10 filamentous fungi and one bacteriophage) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (two notifications of Streptomyces spp. and one of Escherichia coli), and one was excluded where confirmatory data for the risk assessment of a plant protection product (PPP) was requested (Pseudomonas sp.). Three taxonomic units were (re)evaluated: Paracoccus carotinifaciens and Paenibacillus lentus had been previously evaluated in 2008 and 2014, respectively, and were now re-evaluated within this mandate, and Yarrowia lipolytica, which was evaluated for the first time. P. carotinifaciens and P. lentus cannot be granted QPS status due to lack of scientific knowledge. Y. lipolytica is recommended for QPS status, but only for production purpose.

U.K. Foot and Mouth Disease: A Systemic Risk Assessment of Existing Controls.

This article details a systemic analysis of the controls in place and possible interventions available to further reduce the risk of a foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak in the United Kingdom. Using a research-based network analysis tool, we identify vulnerabilities within the multibarrier control system and their corresponding critical control points (CCPs). CCPs represent opportunities for active intervention that produce the greatest improvement to United Kingdom's resilience to future FMD outbreaks. Using an adapted 'features, events, and processes' (FEPs) methodology and network analysis, our results suggest that movements of animals and goods associated with legal activities significantly influence the system's behavior due to their higher frequency and ability to combine and create scenarios of exposure similar in origin to the U.K. FMD outbreaks of 1967/8 and 2001. The systemic risk assessment highlights areas outside of disease control that are relevant to disease spread. Further, it proves to be a powerful tool for demonstrating the need for implementing disease controls that have not previously been part of the system.

Application of a quantitative entry assessment model to compare the relative risk of incursion of zoonotic bat-borne viruses into European Union Member States.

This paper presents a quantitative assessment model for the risk of entry of zoonotic bat-borne viruses into the European Union (EU). The model considers four routes of introduction: human travel, legal trade of products, live animal imports and illegal import of bushmeat and was applied to five virus outbreak scenarios. Two scenarios were considered for Zaire ebolavirus (wEBOV, cEBOV) and other scenarios for Hendra virus, Marburg virus (MARV) and Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus (MERS-CoV). The use of the same framework and generic data sources for all EU Member States (MS) allows for a relative comparison of the probability of virus introduction and of the importance of the routes of introduction among MSs. According to the model wEBOV posed the highest risk of an introduction event within the EU, followed by MARV and MERS-CoV. However, the main route of introduction differed, with wEBOV and MERS-CoV most likely through human travel and MARV through legal trade of foodstuffs. The relative risks to EU MSs as entry points also varied between outbreak scenarios, highlighting the heterogeneity in global trade and travel to the EU MSs. The model has the capability to allow for a continual updating of the risk estimate using new data as, and when, it becomes available. The model provides an horizon scanning tool for use when available data are limited and, therefore, the absolute risk estimates often have high uncertainty. Sensitivity analysis suggested virus prevalence in bats has a large influence on the results; a 90% reduction in prevalence reduced the risk of introduction considerably and resulted in the relative ranking of MARV falling below that for MERS-CoV, due to this parameter disproportionately affecting the risk of introduction from the trade route over human travel.

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) in cervids.

In April and May of 2016, Norway confirmed two cases of chronic wasting disease (CWD) in a wild reindeer and a wild moose, respectively. In the light of this emerging issue, the European Commission requested EFSA to recommend surveillance activities and, if necessary, additional animal health risk-based measures to prevent the introduction of the disease and the spread into/within the EU, specifically Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland and Sweden, and considering seven wild, semidomesticated and farmed cervid species (Eurasian tundra reindeer, Finnish (Eurasian) forest reindeer, moose, roe deer, white-tailed deer, red deer and fallow deer). It was also asked to assess any new evidence on possible public health risks related to CWD. A 3-year surveillance system is proposed, differing for farmed and wild or semidomesticated cervids, with a two-stage sampling programme at the farm/geographically based population unit level (random sampling) and individual level (convenience sampling targeting high-risk animals). The current derogations of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/1918 present a risk of introduction of CWD into the EU. Measures to prevent the spread of CWD within the EU are dependent upon the assumption that the disease is already present; this is currently unknown. The measures listed are intended to contain (limit the geographic extent of a focus) and/or to control (actively stabilise/reduce infection rates in an affected herd or population) the disease where it occurs. With regard to the zoonotic potential, the human species barrier for CWD prions does not appear to be absolute. These prions are present in the skeletal muscle and other edible tissues, so humans may consume infected material in enzootic areas. Epidemiological investigations carried out to date make no association between the occurrence of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease in humans and exposure to CWD prions.

EMA and EFSA Joint Scientific Opinion on measures to reduce the need to use antimicrobial agents in animal husbandry in the European Union, and the resulting impacts on food safety (RONAFA).

EFSA and EMA have jointly reviewed measures taken in the EU to reduce the need for and use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals, and the resultant impacts on antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Reduction strategies have been implemented successfully in some Member States. Such strategies include national reduction targets, benchmarking of antimicrobial use, controls on prescribing and restrictions on use of specific critically important antimicrobials, together with improvements to animal husbandry and disease prevention and control measures. Due to the multiplicity of factors contributing to AMR, the impact of any single measure is difficult to quantify, although there is evidence of an association between reduction in antimicrobial use and reduced AMR. To minimise antimicrobial use, a multifaceted integrated approach should be implemented, adapted to local circumstances. Recommended options (non-prioritised) include: development of national strategies; harmonised systems for monitoring antimicrobial use and AMR development; establishing national targets for antimicrobial use reduction; use of on-farm health plans; increasing the responsibility of veterinarians for antimicrobial prescribing; training, education and raising public awareness; increasing the availability of rapid and reliable diagnostics; improving husbandry and management procedures for disease prevention and control; rethinking livestock production systems to reduce inherent disease risk. A limited number of studies provide robust evidence of alternatives to antimicrobials that positively influence health parameters. Possible alternatives include probiotics and prebiotics, competitive exclusion, bacteriophages, immunomodulators, organic acids and teat sealants. Development of a legislative framework that permits the use of specific products as alternatives should be considered. Further research to evaluate the potential of alternative farming systems on reducing AMR is also recommended. Animals suffering from bacterial infections should only be treated with antimicrobials based on veterinary diagnosis and prescription. Options should be reviewed to phase out most preventive use of antimicrobials and to reduce and refine metaphylaxis by applying recognised alternative measures.

Guidance on the requirements for the development of microbiological criteria.

The European Food Safety Authority asked the Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) to deliver a scientific opinion providing: (i) a review of the approaches used by the BIOHAZ Panel to address requests from risk managers to suggest the establishment of microbiological criteria; (ii) guidance on the required scientific evidence, data and methods/tools necessary for considering the development of microbiological criteria for pathogenic microorganisms and indicator microorganisms; (iii) recommendations on methods/tools to design microbiological criteria and (iv) guidelines for the requirements and tasks of risk assessors, compared to risk managers, in relation to microbiological criteria. This document provides guidance on approaches when: (i) a quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) is available, (ii) prevalence and concentration data are available, but not a QMRA model, and (iii) neither a QMRA nor prevalence and/or concentration data are available. The role of risk assessors should be focused on assessing the impact of different microbiological criteria on public health and on product compliance. It is the task of the risk managers to: (1) formulate unambiguous questions, preferably in consultation with risk assessors, (2) decide on the establishment of a microbiological criterion, or target in primary production sectors, and to formulate the specific intended purpose for using such criteria, (3) consider the uncertainties in impact assessments on public health and on product compliance and (4) decide the point in the food chain where the microbiological criteria are intended to be applied and decide on the actions which should be taken in case of non-compliance. It is the task of the risk assessors to support risk managers to ensure that questions are formulated in a way that a precise answer can be given, if sufficient information is available, and to ensure clear and unambiguous answers, including the assessment of uncertainties, based on available scientific evidence.

Evaluation of the Application for new alternative biodiesel production process for rendered fat of Cat 1 (BDI-RepCat process, AT).

A new alternative method for the production of biodiesel from rendered fat of all categories of animal by-products was assessed. The process was compared to the approved biodiesel production process described in Chapter IV Section 2 D of Annex IV of Commission Regulation (EU) 142/2011. Tallow derived from Category 1 material is treated according to Method 1 from the same Regulation (133°C, 20 min, 3 bar) and subsequently mixed with 15% methanol, heated to reaction temperature (220°C) in several heat exchangers and transferred into the continuous conversion reactor by means of a high pressure pump (80 bar) for 30 min. In the conversion phase, there is an exposure to methanol in the absence of alkaline or acidic conditions. The impact of this procedure on the thermostability of transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE) has not been assessed in the literature. After the reaction, the biodiesel/glycerol mixture is distilled under vacuum at a minimum temperature of 150°C and a maximum pressure of 10 mbar, which is equivalent to the distillation step in the approved biodiesel production process, for which a 3 log10 reduction factor in PrP27-30 was obtained. Therefore, a similar level of TSE infectivity reduction could be expected for that phase of the method. A previous EFSA Opinion established that a reduction of 6 log10 in TSE infectivity should be achieved by any proposed alternative method in order to be equivalent to the approved processing method. This level of reduction has not been shown with experimental trials run under conditions equivalent to the ones described for the RepCat process. It was not possible to conclude whether or not the level of TSE infectivity reduction in the RepCat process is at least of 6 log10. Therefore, it was also not possible to conclude about the equivalence with the approved biodiesel production process.

Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 5: suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2016.

EFSA was requested to assess the safety of a broad range of biological agents in the context of notifications for market authorisation as sources of food and feed additives, enzymes and plant protection products. The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) assessment was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-assessment to support safety risk assessments performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The safety of unambiguously defined biological agents (at the highest taxonomic unit appropriate for the purpose for which an application is intended) and the completeness of the body of knowledge were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected as 'qualifications' in connection with a recommendation for a QPS status. A total of 57 biological agents were notified to EFSA between the end of April 2016 and the beginning of September 2016. From these, 34 biological agents already had a QPS status and did not require further evaluation, and 10 were not included in the evaluation as they are filamentous fungi or enterococci, biological groups which have been excluded from QPS evaluation since 2014. Three notifications for Streptomyces violaceoruber, one for Streptomyces albus, one for Bacillus circulans and four for Escherichia coli were not evaluated for QPS status because these species were recently assessed and considered not suitable for QPS status. Therefore, only four notifications related to three taxonomic units were evaluated for QPS status. Of these, Arthrobacter ramosus and Pseudomonas fluorescens are not recommended for the QPS list. Bacillus smithii is recommended for the QPS status.