Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of salinomycin sodium (Sacox®) for rabbits for fattening (Huvepharma N.V.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the coccidiostat salinomycin sodium (Sacox®) for rabbits for fattening. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the use of salinomycin sodium (SAL-Na) from Sacox® does not raise safety concerns for the target species, consumers, users and the environment with regard to the production strain. In the absence of adequate tolerance studies, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of SAL-Na from Sacox® for rabbits for fattening. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for the consumer when it is used at the proposed maximum level of 25 mg SAL-Na/kg complete feed for rabbits and a withdrawal period of 1 day is respected. The following maximum residue limits (MRL) are proposed for the marker residue compound salinomycin (SAL): 0.2 and 0.03 mg SAL/kg for liver and kidney, respectively. The additive is not irritant to skin and eyes but should be considered a potential dermal and respiratory sensitiser. A risk for inhalation toxicity could not be excluded. The use of the SAL-Na from Sacox® in feed for rabbits for fattening up to the highest proposed level will not pose a risk for the terrestrial and aquatic compartment and ground water. The risk of secondary poisoning can be excluded for worm-eating birds and mammals, while it cannot be excluded for fish-eating birds and mammals. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that SAL-Na from Sacox® at the minimum concentration of 20 mg SAL-Na/kg complete feed has the potential to control coccidiosis in rabbits for fattening. Development of resistance to SAL-Na of field Eimeria spp. strains isolated from rabbits for fattening should be monitored.

Predicting Response to Exclusive Combined Radio-Chemotherapy in Naso-Oropharyngeal Cancer: The Role of Texture Analysis.

The aim of this work is to identify MRI texture features able to predict the response to radio-chemotherapy (RT-CHT) in patients with naso-oropharyngeal carcinoma (NPC-OPC) before treatment in order to help clinical decision making. Textural features were derived from ADC maps and post-gadolinium T1-images on a single MRI machine for 37 patients with NPC-OPC. Patients were divided into two groups (responders/non-responders) according to results from MRI scans and 18F-FDG-PET/CT performed at follow-up 3-4 and 12 months after therapy and biopsy. Pre-RT-CHT lesions were segmented, and radiomic features were extracted. A non-parametric Mann-Whitney test was performed. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Receiver operating characteristic curves and area-under-the-curve values were generated; a 95% confidence interval (CI) was reported. A radiomic model was constructed using the LASSO algorithm. After feature selection on MRI T1 post-contrast sequences, six features were statistically significant: gldm_DependenceEntropy and DependenceNonUniformity, glrlm_RunEntropy and RunLengthNonUniformity, and glszm_SizeZoneNonUniformity and ZoneEntropy, with significant cut-off values between responder and non-responder group. With the LASSO algorithm, the radiomic model showed an AUC of 0.89 and 95% CI: 0.78-0.99. In ADC, five features were selected with an AUC of 0.84 and 95% CI: 0.68-1. Texture analysis on post-gadolinium T1-images and ADC maps could potentially predict response to therapy in patients with NPC-OPC who will undergo exclusive treatment with RT-CHT, being, therefore, a useful tool in therapeutical-clinical decision making.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of monensin sodium (Coxidin®) for chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, turkeys for fattening and turkeys reared for breeding (Huvepharma N.V.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of monensin sodium (Coxidin®) as a coccidiostat for chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, turkeys for fattening and turkeys reared for breeding. The additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that Coxidin® remains safe for turkeys for fattening (up to 16 weeks) and extends this conclusion to turkeys reared for breeding (up to 16 weeks). The Panel was not in the position to confirm that the current maximum authorised level of 125 mg monensin sodium/kg complete feed remains safe for chickens for fattening and chickens reared for laying. The use of monensin sodium from Coxidin® at the corresponding maximum authorised/proposed use levels in the target species is safe for the consumer. The existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for poultry tissues ensure consumer safety. No withdrawal time is necessary. Both formulations of Coxidin® pose a risk by inhalation. The formulation with wheat bran as a carrier was neither irritant to the skin nor a skin sensitiser but it was irritant to the eyes. In the absence of data, no conclusions could be made on the potential of the formulation containing calcium carbonate to be irritant to skin and eyes and to be a skin sensitiser. The use of monensin sodium from Coxidin® in complete feed for the target species poses no risk for the terrestrial compartments and for sediment. No risk for groundwater is expected. For chickens for fattening the risk for aquatic compartment cannot be excluded, but no risks are expected for the other animal categories. There is no risk of secondary poisoning. Coxidin® is efficacious in controlling coccidiosis at a level of 100 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening and at 60 mg/kg complete feed for turkeys for fattening. These conclusions are extended to chickens reared for laying and turkeys reared for breeding. The Panel noted that there are signs of development of resistance of Eimeria spp. to monensin sodium.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of narasin (Monteban® G100) for chickens for fattening (Elanco GmbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the coccidiostat narasin (Monteban® G100) for chickens for fattening. In a previous opinion, uncertainties remained on the identification and characterisation of the non-genetically modified production strain of the active substance narasin. The Panel could not conclude either on the safety of Monteban® G100 for chickens for fattening or on the efficacy of the additive at the minimum applied concentration. The FEEDAP Panel excluded risks for environment but the risk for sediment compartment could not be assessed. The applicant provided supplementary information to cover the data gaps and substituted the narasin production strain from Streptomyces spp. NRRL 8092 to Streptomyces spp. NRRL B-67771. The information submitted to taxonomically identify the production strain did not allow to assign it to any described microbial species. Based on the information provided, the Panel concluded that the use of Monteban® G100 did not raise safety concerns as regards the production strain for the target animal, consumer, user and environment. The Panel concluded that 70 mg narasin/kg complete feed was safe for chickens for fattening with a margin of safety of 1.4; narasin from Monteban® G100 was unlikely to increase shedding of Salmonella Enteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium and Campylobacter jejuni. Narasin, when used in chickens for fattening at 70 mg/kg feed, was not expected to pose a risk to the aquatic compartment and to sediment, while a risk for the terrestrial compartment could not be excluded. No risk for groundwater was expected, nor for secondary poisoning via the terrestrial food chain, but the risk of secondary poisoning via the aquatic food chain could not be excluded. The Panel concluded that 60 mg narasin/kg feed was efficacious in controlling coccidiosis in chickens for fattening.

Spatial distributions and temporal trends (2009-2020) of chemical mixtures in streams and rivers across Lombardy region (Italy).

Chemical mixtures in the environment are of increasing concern in the scientific community and regulators. Indeed, evidence indicates that aquatic wildlife and humans can be simultaneously and successively exposed to multiple chemicals mainly originating from different anthropic sources by direct uptake from water and indirectly via eating aquatic organisms. This study analyses a large set of sampling data referring to the entire Lombardy region, the most industrialised and at the same time the most important agriculture area in Italy, investigating the presence and potential effects of chemical mixtures in surface water bodies. We enriched and further developed an approach based on a previous work, where the overall mixture toxicity was evaluated for three representative aquatic organisms (algae, Daphnia, fish) using the concentration addition model to combine exposure with ecotoxicological data. The calculation of the mixture toxicity has been realised for two scenarios, namely best- and worst-case scenarios. The former considered only quantified compounds in the monitoring campaign, while the latter also included substances with concentrations below the limit of quantification (LoQ). Differences between the two scenario results established the potential toxicity range. Our findings revealed that differences were minimal when the calculated toxicity in the best-case scenario indicated potential risk and, on the contrary, they suggest that the worst-case scenario is overly conservative; we could also state that including substances with concentrations below the LoQ when calculating the overall toxicity of the mixture is useless and then we focused solely on the best-case scenario. The analysis of spatial and temporal risk trends together with contaminant types and target organisms highlighted specific clusters of contamination. Finally, in several cases, our study found that only few compounds were responsible for the majority of mixture toxicity.

Safety for the environment of a feed additive consisting of diclazuril (Coxiril®) for chickens reared for laying and pheasants (Huvepharma NV).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety for the environment of diclazuril (Coxiril®) as a coccidiostat feed additive for chickens reared for laying and pheasants. In its previous assessments, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not reach a final conclusion on the risk resulting from the use of diclazuril in acid soil from Coxiril®. On the basis of the new data provided, the FEEDAP Panel updates the previous conclusions as follows: no risk is expected for the terrestrial compartment and for sediment when diclazuril is used in chickens reared for laying and to pheasants at the proposed condition of use (in both acidic and non-acidic soils). No concern for groundwater is expected for both acidic and non-acidic soils. Due to the lack of data, no conclusions can be drawn for the aquatic compartment. Diclazuril does not have the potential for bioaccumulation; therefore, a risk of secondary poisoning is unlikely.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of halofuginone hydrobromide (STENOROL®) for chickens for fattening and turkeys for fattening/reared for breeding (Huvepharma N.V.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a new scientific opinion on the coccidiostat halofuginone hydrobromide (STENOROL®) when used as a feed additive for chickens for fattening and turkeys for fattening/reared for breeding. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concludes that the safety for turkeys for fattening established in its previous opinion can be extended to turkeys for breeding up to 12 weeks of age. Based on the new data provided on the safety for consumer, environment and efficacy, the Panel updates its previous conclusions as follows: halofuginone hydrobromide is not genotoxic. Applying an uncertainty factor of 100 to the lowest no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 0.03 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0.3 µg halofuginone/kg bw is established. The chronic exposure of consumers to residues of halofuginone would amount to 6-19% of the ADI after 3 days of withdrawal. Therefore, the Panel considers that the additive is safe for the consumer of tissues obtained from chickens for fattening and turkeys for fattening fed the additive at a maximum level of 3 mg/kg complete feed at a 3-day withdrawal time. For control purposes, the Panel recommends the setting of the following maximum residue limits (MRLs): liver, 50 µg/kg; kidney, 40 µg/kg; muscle, 3 µg/kg; skin/fat, 10 µg/kg wet tissue. Based on an updated environmental risk assessment, no concern for groundwater is expected. Halofuginone is unlikely to bioaccumulate and the risk of secondary poisoning is not likely to occur. No safety concerns are expected for terrestrial and aquatic environments. The additive has the potential to control coccidiosis in chickens for fattening and turkeys for fattening/reared for breeding up to 12 weeks of age at a minimum level of 2 mg/kg complete feed.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of copper(II)-betaine complex for all animal species (Biochem Zusatzstoffe Handels- und Produktionsges. mbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a copper(II)-betaine complex as nutritional feed additive for all animal species. Based on the results of a tolerance study carried out in chicken, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening when used up to the current maximum authorised levels of copper in feed; this conclusion was extrapolated to all animal species and categories at the respective maximum copper levels in complete feed authorised in the European Union. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the copper(II)-betaine complex in animal nutrition at the maximum copper levels authorised for the animal species poses no concern to the safety of consumers. Regarding the safety for the environment, the use of the additive in feed for terrestrial animals and land-based aquaculture is considered safe under proposed conditions of use. The data available do not allow the conclusion to be made on the safety of the additive for marine sediment when it is used in sea cages. The additive is not a skin irritant, but it is an irritant to the eyes. Due to the traces of nickel, the additive is considered to be a respiratory and skin sensitiser. The Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the product.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of a zinc(II)-betaine complex for all animal species (Biochem Zusatzstoffe Handels- und Produktionsges. mbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a zinc(II)-betaine complex as nutritional additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening. This conclusion could be extrapolated to all animal species and categories provided that the maximum authorised levels in the EU for total zinc in feed are not exceeded. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of the zinc(II)-betaine complex in animal nutrition is of no concern for consumer safety provided that the maximum authorised total zinc levels in feed are respected. The additive is considered to be a skin and respiratory sensitiser due to the presence of nickel; it is irritant to the eyes, but not to the skin. The use of the additive in animal nutrition for terrestrial animals and land-based aquaculture at the proposed use levels is considered safe for terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. The available data do not allow the conclusion to be made on the safety of the additive for the marine sediment when it is used in sea cages. Based on the deposition of zinc in edible tissues/organs in chickens for fattening, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is a source of bioavailable zinc, comparable to the standard inorganic zinc source, and therefore, the additive is efficacious in meeting the birds zinc requirements. This conclusion can be extrapolated to all animal species and categories.

Safety of a feed additive consisting of semduramicin sodium (Aviax 5%) for chickens for fattening (Phibro Animal Health s.a.).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of the coccidiostat Aviax 5% (semduramicin sodium) when used in feed for chickens for fattening. In a previous assessment, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the taxonomical identification of the production strain at species level and on the absence of genetic determinants for antimicrobial resistance. In addition, the Panel could not conclude on the safety for the target animals and could not set maximum residue limits to protect consumers. Regarding the safety for the environment, although the use of the additive was considered safe for the terrestrial compartment, a risk for the aquatic compartment and for groundwater pollution could not be excluded. Based on the new data provided, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that there are no safety concerns for the target animals, consumer, user and environment regarding the production strain of semduramicin sodium. Based on the results in the tolerance trial, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additive is safe for chickens for fattening up to the maximum recommended level (25 mg/kg complete feed), but no margin of safety can be established. The use of semduramicin sodium at a maximum level of 25 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening is safe for consumers with no withdrawal time. Based on the new data provided and the current requirements for environmental risk assessment, the use of semduramicin sodium from Aviax 5% in feed for chickens for fattening up to 25 mg/kg complete feed does not pose a risk for groundwater nor for aquatic and sediment compartments, while a risk for the terrestrial compartment cannot be excluded. The bioaccumulation and the risk for secondary poisoning are considered to be low.

MIMERA: An online tool for the sustainable pesticide use at field scale.

As echoed in the European Green Deal and Farm to Fork strategy, the EU agricultural policy has clear objectives of improving the sustainability (environmental, economic and social) of farm productions. The environmental goals are supported by promotion of organic farming and the responsible management of inputs such as fertilisers and pesticides. In this framework, there is a need is to provide farmers with tools to evaluate the best options for reducing environmental impact and measure performances in improving the sustainability of their productions. This paper introduces MIMERA, a GIS easy-to-use tool for the sustainable use of pesticides at farm level. MIMERA was developed in the framework of the Train-Agro project funded by the Lombardia Region (Italy), in the framework of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development Programme (EAFRD). The main goal is to help professional pesticide users to identify the best pest management strategies by comparing the environmental risk of authorized commercial formulations of pesticides, identifying parcel most at risk within the farm boundaries and suggesting the most appropriate risk mitigation measures for the prevention of surface water contamination. Finally, MIMERA offers the opportunity to track the risk trend of the selected pest management strategies utilized during years. The proposed methodology and structure of MIMERA are described along with underlying data and algorithms are described. An example of its application by considering different pest management strategies adopted by farmers in an area characterized by the intensive presence of maize crop in Lombardia Region is presented.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) for all animal species (Katyon Technologies Limited).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) as a feed additive for all animal species. The additive BHT is considered safe for chickens for fattening and weaned piglets at the maximum proposed concentration of 150 mg/kg complete feed. This conclusion is extended to chickens reared for laying and extrapolated to pigs for fattening. In the absence of data, no conclusion on the safety for the other target species could be drawn. The exposure of the consumer to BHT from tissues and products of animals fed the additive ranged from 1% to 3% of the acceptable daily intake (ADI). The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of BHT as a feed additive at the proposed conditions of use is of no concern for the safety of the consumers. Exposure of the user to BHT via inhalation is likely; however, the Panel is not in the position to conclude on the potential inhalation toxicity of the additive. BHT is a skin and eye irritant, no conclusions can be drawn on the potential of the additive to be a skin sensitiser. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of BHT for the environment. The additive BHT is considered an efficacious antioxidant in feedingstuffs for all animal species.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) for all animal species (Lanxess Deutschland GmbH).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) as a feed additive for all animal species. The additive BHT is considered safe for chickens for fattening and weaned piglets at the maximum proposed concentration of 150 mg/kg complete feed. This conclusion is extended to chickens reared for laying and extrapolated to pigs for fattening. In the absence of data, no conclusion on the safety for the other target species could be drawn. The exposure of the consumer to BHT from tissues and products of animals fed the additive ranged from 1% to 3% of the acceptable daily intake (ADI). The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of BHT as a feed additive at the proposed conditions of use is of no concern for the safety of the consumers. Exposure of the user to BHT via inhalation is likely; however, the Panel is not in the position to conclude on the potential inhalation toxicity of the additive. BHT is a skin and eye irritant, no conclusions can be drawn on the potential of the additive to be a skin sensitiser. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of BHT for the environment. The additive BHT is considered an efficacious antioxidant in feedingstuffs for all animal species.

Mix-Tool: An Edge-of-Field Approach to Predict Pesticide Mixtures of Concern in Surface Water From Agricultural Crops.

Current regulation on the authorization of plant protection products (PPPs) in the European Union is limited to the evaluation of ecological risks for the single active substances they contain. However, plant protection treatments in agriculture often consist of PPPs already containing more than one active substance; moreover, each cropped field receives multiple applications per year, leading to complex pesticide mixtures in the environment. Different transport processes lead to a multitude of heterogeneous and potentially toxic substances that, for example, may reach water bodies and act simultaneously on natural freshwater ecosystems. In this context, the development of methodologies and tools to manage risks of pesticides mixtures is imperative to improve the current ecological risk assessment procedures and to avoid further deterioration of ecological quality of natural resources. The present study suggests new procedures for identifying pesticide mixtures of potential concern released from agricultural crops in surface water. The approach follows the European Union regulatory context for the authorization of PPPs in the market (edge-of field risk assessment) and requires the use of Forum for the Co-ordination of pesticide fate models and their Use (FOCUS) models (Step 3 and 4) for calculating the concentrations in surface water of mixture components on a daily basis. Moreover, it uses concentration addition models to calculate the toxic potency of the pesticide mixtures released by a treated crop. To implement this procedure, we developed a simple Microsoft-Excel-based tool. We also considered two case studies (maize and apple tree), representative of Italian agricultural scenarios for annual and perennial crops. Moreover, we compared results with 3 years of monitoring data of surface water bodies of the Lombardia region (northern Italy) where the two crops are largely present. Environ Toxicol Chem 2022;41:2028-2038. © 2022 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of SETAC.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of ethoxyquin (6-ethoxy-1,2-dihydro-2,2,4-trimethylquinoline) for all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Ethoxyquin is synthetised from p-phenetidine, a possible mutagen, which remains in the additive as an impurity at concentrations of < 2.5 mg/kg additive. Ethoxyquin is considered safe for all animal species at the proposed inclusion level of 50 mg/kg complete feed. However, owing the presence of p-phenetidine, no safe level of the additive in feed for long-living and reproductive animals could be identified. The FEEDAP Panel derived a health-based guidance value of 0.006 mg ethoxyquin dimer (EQDM)/kg bw per day and applied it to the sum of ethoxyquin and its transformation products. A maximum total concentration of 50 mg ethoxyquin/kg complete feed for all animal species, except dairy ruminants, would not pose a risk for the consumer. However, in the absence of data on p-phenetidine residues in tissues and products of animal origin, no conclusion on the safety for the consumer could be drawn. The conclusions on consumer safety assume that the maximum total concentration of 50 mg EQ/kg feed is expressed as the sum of EQ, EQDM, EQI and DHEQ. Exposure of the unprotected user to p-phenetidine via inhalation should be minimised. No safety concerns for groundwater are expected. It is not possible to conclude on the safety of EQ for the terrestrial compartment. A risk for the aquatic compartment cannot be excluded when ethoxyquin is used in terrestrial animals. Unacceptable risk is not expected for freshwater sediment-dwelling organisms. A risk of secondary poisoning via the terrestrial food chain is not expected, whereas a risk via the aquatic food chain cannot be excluded. No concerns for aquatic organisms are expected for ethoxyquin used in fish farmed in land-based system, a risk cannot be excluded for marine sediment dwelling organisms when ethoxyquin is used in sea-cages. Ethoxyquin is considered efficacious in the range 25-50 mg/kg complete feed.

Use of large datasets of measured environmental concentrations for the ecological risk assessment of chemical mixtures in Italian streams: A case study.

A method to evaluate the ecological risk of chemical mixtures in water bodies is here presented. In the first phase, the approach considered routine chemical monitoring data (MEC: measured environmental concentrations) obtained from the Italian National Institute for Environmental Protection and Research, which were georeferenced to a single coordinate system for each monitoring station. The overall mixture toxicity were then evaluated for three representative aquatic organisms (algae, Daphnia, fish) using the concentration addition model to combine exposure with ecotoxicological data (from different databases). A database management system was used to facilitate the creation, organisation, and management of the large datasets of this study. The outputs were obtained as GIS-based mixture risk maps and tables (listing the toxic unit of mixtures and individual substances) useful for further analysis. The method was applied to an Italian watershed (Adda River) as a case study. In the first phase, the mixture toxicity was calculated using two scenarios: best- and worst-case; wherein the former included only those compounds that were be detected, while the latter involved also substances with concentrations below the limit of quantification. The ratio between the two scenarios indicated the range within which mixture toxicity should ideally vary. The method demonstrates that these ratios were very small when the calculated toxicity using the best case indicated a potential risk and vice versa, indicating that the worst-case scenario could not be appropriate (extremely conservative). Consequently, in the successive phase, we focused exclusively on the best-case scenario. Finally, this approach allowed the priority mixture identification (those most likely occurring in the analysed water samples), algae as the organism at the highest risk, and the substances that contributed the most to the overall mixture toxicity (terbuthylazine and s-metolachlor for algae, and chlorpyrifos and chlorpyrifos-CH3 for Daphnia and fish).

Use of the Species Sensitivity Distribution Approach to Derive Ecological Threshold of Toxicological Concern (eco-TTC) for Pesticides.

The species sensitivity distribution (SSD) calculates the hazardous concentration at which 5% of species (HC5) will be potentially affected. For many compounds, HC5 values are unavailable impeding the derivation of SSD curves. Through a detailed bibliographic survey, we selected HC5 values (from acute toxicity tests) for freshwater aquatic species and 129 pesticides. The statistical distribution and variability of the HC5 values within the chemical classes were evaluated. Insecticides are the most toxic compounds in the aquatic communities (HC5 = 1.4 × 10-3 µmol L-1), followed by herbicides (HC5 = 3.3 × 10-2 µmol L-1) and fungicides (HC5 = 7.8 µmol L-1). Subsequently, the specificity of the mode of action (MoA) of pesticides on freshwater aquatic communities was investigated by calculating the ratio between the estimated baseline toxicity for aquatic communities and the HC5 experimental values gathered from the literature. Moreover, we proposed and validated a scheme to derive the ecological thresholds of toxicological concern (eco-TTC) of pesticides for which data on their effects on aquatic communities are not available. We proposed eco-TTCs for different classes of insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides with a specific MoA, and three eco-TTCs for those chemicals with unavailable MoA. We consider the proposed approach and eco-TTC values useful for risk management purposes.

Sub-lethal effects of soil multiple contamination on the avoidance behaviour of Eisenia fetida.

Natural ecosystems are frequently exposed to complex mixtures of different chemicals. However, the environmental risk assessment is mainly based on data from individual substances. In this study, the individual and combined effects on the terrestrial earthworm E. fetida exposed to the anionic surfactant sodium lauryl ether sulphate (SLES) and the pesticides chlorpyrifos (CPF) and imidacloprid (IMI) were investigated, by using the avoidance behaviour as endpoint. Earthworms were exposed to a soil artificially contaminated with five sub-lethal concentrations of each contaminant, both as single substances and in combination of binary and ternary mixtures. Overall results showed that IMI provoked the highest avoidance effect on earthworms, with a concentration value that induced an avoidance rate of 50% of treated organisms (AC50) of 1.30 mg/kg, followed by CPF (AC50 75.26 mg/kg) and SLES (AC50 139.67 mg/kg). The application of the Combination Index (CI) method, indicated that a deviation from the additive response occurred for most of the tested chemical mixtures, leading to synergistic or antagonistic avoidance responses. Synergistic effects were produced by the exposure to the two lowest concentrations of the CPF+IMI mixture, and by the highest concentrations of SLES+CPF and SLES+CPF+IMI mixtures. On the contrary, antagonistic effects were observed at the lowest concentrations of the binary mixtures containing the SLES and at almost all the tested concentrations of the SLES+CPF+IMI mixture (with the exception of the highest tested concentration). These results show that the avoidance test is suitable to assess the detrimental effects exerted on earthworms by chemical mixtures in soil ecosystems and the use of behavioural endpoints can increase the ecological significance of environmental risk assessment procedures.

Safety for the environment of a feed additive consisting of nicarbazin (Coxar®) for use in turkeys for fattening (Huvepharma N.V.).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety for the environment of the coccidiostat Coxar® (nicarbazin) when used in feed for turkeys for fattening. In previous assessments, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of Coxar® for the environment due to concerns on 4,40-dinitrocarbanilide (DNC, one of the moieties of nicarbazin). On the basis of the new data provided, the FEEDAP Panel updates its previous conclusions on the safety of Coxar® for the environment as follows: The use of nicarbazin from Coxar® in complete feed for turkeys does not pose a risk for the terrestrial and aquatic compartment and in sediment. No concern for groundwater is expected. The bioaccumulation potential of nicarbazin in the environment is low.

Safety of lignosulphonate for all animal species.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of lignosulphonate, when used as a technological additive, functional group: binders. In a previous opinion, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive for target species and for the environment. The applicant provided additional information that was assessed in the current opinion. As regards the safety for the target species, the maximum recommended content of lignosulphonate of 10,000 mg/kg complete feed is considered safe in weaned piglet. A safe concentration of lignosulphonate in feed for salmonids and dairy cows could not be identified. The FEEDAP Panel reiterates also its previous conclusions that '10,000 mg lignosulphonate/kg complete feed is safe for chickens for fattening, laying hens and cattle for fattening but a margin of safety cannot be identified. Therefore, this conclusion cannot be extended to all animal species/categories'. Considering the absence of adverse effects confirmed by all the ecotoxicity studies up to very high concentrations, no concerns for the environment are expected from the use of this additive in animal nutrition according the conditions of use. Lignosulphonate is efficacious as pellet binder.