ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for renewal of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum LMG P-21295, a technological additive to improve ensiling of fresh material for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. The Panel is not in the position to conclude on the skin and eye irritation potential of the additive. No conclusions can be drawn on the potential of the additive to cause skin sensitisation, but it is considered to be a respiratory sensitiser. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of 6-phytase produced by the genetically modified strain Komagataella phaffii CGMCC 12056 (APSA PHYTAFEED® 20,000 GR/L) as a zootechnical feed additive (functional group: digestibility enhancers) for pigs for fattening at a minimum recommended level of 1,000 U /kg feed. In a previous assessment, three trials were submitted; one of them showed significant improvements on zootechnical parameters supporting the efficacy of the additive. The other two trials evaluating apparent faecal phosphorus digestibility and bone mineralisation, showed no improvements on phosphorus retention in bone and, therefore, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive. The applicant submitted two new efficacy studies in pigs for fattening evaluating the animal's zootechnical performance, apparent faecal phosphorus digestibility and bone mineralisation. One of the trials was not considered due to high rates of mortality, culling of animals and medical treatments applied. In the other trial, significant improvements on final body weight and apparent total track phosphorus digestibility were found in the animals that received the phytase at 1,000 U/kg complete feed. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive in pigs for fattening.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of the preparation consisting of viable cells of Bacillus subtilis CNCM I-4606, B. subtilis CNCM I-5043, B. subtilis CNCM I-4607 and Lactococcus lactis CNCM I-4609 when used as a technological additive (hygiene condition enhancer) for all animal species. In a previous opinion, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive is safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. The Panel also considered the additive to be non-irritant to skin and eyes, nor a dermal sensitiser, but a respiratory sensitiser. Moreover, the data provided were not sufficient to conclude on the efficacy of the additive to significantly reduce the growth of Salmonella Typhimurium or Escherichia coli in feed. In the current assessment, the applicant provided supplementary information to address these flaws and limited the claimed effect to 'prevent (re)contamination by Salmonella Typhimurium'. Based on the new studies, the Panel concluded that the additive at a minimum proposed inclusion level of 1 × 109 colony forming units (CFU) B. subtilis and 1 × 109 CFU L. lactis per litre showed potential to reduce Salmonella Typhimurium growth in feeds with high moisture content (60-90% moisture).
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of endo-1,4-beta-xylanase produced by Trichoderma reesei ATCC PTA-5588, protease produced by Bacillus subtilis CBS 148232, and alpha-amylase produced by Bacillus licheniformis ATCC SD-6525, Axtra® XAP 104 TPT, for chickens for fattening, laying hens and minor poultry species. In the previous assessment, a series of shortcomings did not allow to conclude on the safety of the product. The shortcomings included uncertainty on the presence of viable cells of one of the production strains; uncertainty on the identity of the production strains of the â â â â â used in the manufacturing process of the protease and their presence in the final additive; and uncertainty about the test item used for the toxicological testing of the xylanase. Moreover, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy in laying hens. The applicant submitted some new information to address some of the limitations previously identified. Moreover, the applicant declared a change in the production strain of the protease, substituting B. subtilis ATCC SD-2107 for B. subtilis CBS 148232. The Panel concluded that the additive is safe for the target species at the recommended use level (1,000 xylanase U, 100 amylase U and 2,000 protease U per kg feed). The additive is safe for the consumers of food products obtained from animals fed with the additive and raises no concerns for the environment. The Panel could not conclude on the skin/eye irritancy potential of the additive nor on its dermal sensitisation potential. Owing to the proteinaceous nature of the active substances, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive is efficacious in chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying and minor poultry species up to the point of lay at the level of 2,000 xylanase U, 200 amylase U and 4,000 protease U per kg feed (double the minimum recommended use level). Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for laying hens.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on Lentilactobacillus diolivorans (formerly Lactobacillus diolivorans) DSM 33625 when used as a technological additive to improve ensiling of forage. The additive is intended for use with all forages and for all animal species at a proposed minimum concentration of 1 × 108 colony forming units (CFU)/kg forage. The bacterial species L. diolivorans is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. As the identity of the strain has been clearly established and no acquired antimicrobial resistance determinants of concern were detected, the use of the strain as a silage additive is considered safe for livestock species, for consumers of products from animals fed the treated silage and for the environment. The additive is not a skin or an eye irritant. In the absence of data, no conclusion can be drawn on the skin sensitisation of the additive. Given the proteinaceous nature of the active agent, the additive should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that Lentilactobacillus diolivorans DSM 33625 at a minimum concentration of 1 × 108 CFU/kg forage may extend the aerobic stability of silage prepared from easy and moderately difficult to ensile forage material with a DM range of 32-65%.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of a product consisting of viable spores of Bacillus velezensis NRRL B-67257 as a zootechnical additive for chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding and minor poultry species. The additive has the tradename Correlink™ ABS747 Bacillus subtilis and is not currently authorised in the European Union. It is intended for use in complete feed for the target species at a minimum inclusion level of 1.5 × 108 CFU/kg complete feed. In a previous opinion the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for the poultry species due to the potential cross-contamination of the control diets in two of the three studies provided. The applicant has provided supplementary information to exclude this possibility. The new data showed that the gene used as marker in the previous analyses is non-specific of the NRRL B-67257 strain, which precluded the adequate quantification of the active agent in the feeds used in the studies. Moreover, in a second analysis, the active agent could not be isolated from the field excreta samples collected from either from the treated or the control group of one of the formerly submitted efficacy studies. The Panel concluded that the methodology was not able to discriminate between the strain under assessment and the background. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of Correlink™ ABS747 for all growing poultry species based on the data newly provided.
ABSTRACT
The additive RONOZYME® Hiphos (GT/L) contains 6-phytase produced with a genetically modified strain of the filamentous fungus Aspergillus oryzae, it is currently authorised for poultry, pigs for fattening, weaned piglets and sows. The applicant has requested to change the production strain, substituting strain A. oryzae DSM 22594 for A. oryzae DSM 33699. RONOZYME® Hiphos (GT/L), manufactured with the production strain A. oryzae DSM 33699, did not give rise to safety concerns with regard to the genetic modification of the production strain. No viable cells of the production strain nor its recombinant DNA were detected in an intermediate product representative of both final forms of the additive. RONOZYME® Hiphos (GT/L) was considered safe for poultry, pigs for fattening, weaned piglets and sows at the recommended inclusion levels of 500-4,000 FYT/kg complete feed. The use of RONOZYME® Hiphos GT and L manufactured with the production strain A. oryzae DSM 33699 raised no concerns for consumers. In the absence of data on the final formulations, the Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to eyes or skin, or a skin sensitiser. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, the additive was considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive manufactured by A. oryzae DSM 33699 raises no safety concerns for the environment. The additive has the potential to be efficacious in poultry, pigs for fattening, weaned piglets and sows at 500 FYT/kg complete feed.
ABSTRACT
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 efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate for all animal species. The safety of the additive for the target species, consumer, user and the environment has already been assessed previously, however the efficacy remained inconclusive due to limitations in the study with chickens for fattening. In the present assessment, the applicant submitted a new efficacy study in weaned piglets. After the assessment of the new data submitted by the applicant, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of ferrous lysinate sulfate in weaned piglets.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of authorisation of ammonium chloride (Amoklor™) as a zootechnical additive for all ruminants, dogs and cats and its extension of use in sows for urinary health. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no new evidence that would lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concludes that the additive remains safe for ruminants other than lambs for fattening, lambs for fattening, cats and dogs, consumers and the environment under the current authorised conditions of use. Inhalation exposure of the additive is considered very likely. Amoklor™ should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser but not a skin sensitiser. The additive is not irritant to the skin, but the Panel could not conclude on its eye irritation potential. The present application for renewal of the authorisation does not include a proposal for amending or supplementing the conditions of the original authorisation that would have an impact on the efficacy of the additive. Therefore, there was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. Regarding the extension of use in sows, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additive is safe and efficacious for sows at the inclusion level of 5,000 mg/kg feedingstuffs from week 9th to 11th of gestation and from week 15th of gestation to 1st of lactation.
ABSTRACT
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 endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced by Aspergillus fijiensis CBS 589.94 (RONOZYME® VP (CT/L)) as a zootechnical feed additive for chickens for fattening and weaned piglets. Based on the no observed adverse effect level identified in a subchronic oral toxicity study in rats and the tolerance trials provided, the additive was considered safe for chickens for fattening and weaned piglets at the proposed conditions of use. The Panel also concluded that the use of the product as a feed additive does not rise concerns for consumers and the environment. Owing to the lack of data obtained with the final formulations, the Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to skin and eyes or on its potential as a dermal sensitiser. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious as a zootechnical additive in chickens for fattening and weaned piglets at the minimum recommended level of 10 FBG/kg feed.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of sodium saccharin as a sensory feed additive (flavouring compound) for suckling and weaned piglets, fattening pigs, calves for rearing and for fattening. In a previous assessment, the Panel on Additives and Products or substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) could not conclude on the safety of the additive for the environment because concentrations of the additive or its degradation product 4-hydroxysaccharin in groundwater above 0.1 µg/L were likely to occur. In addition, regarding user safety, sodium saccharin was considered to be potentially harmful by inhalation or by contact to skin and eyes. In the current opinion, the applicant restricted the use to suckling and weaned piglets and up to a use level of 5 mg/kg complete feed. In relation to the user safety, the additive was neither a skin or eye irritant, nor a dermal sensitiser. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be toxic by inhalation. Regarding the safety of the additive for the environment, the new conditions of use describe a maximum use level of 5 mg sodium saccharin/kg feed. The applicant indicated that a restriction to a lower use level due to environmental safety would be accepted and submitted an environment risk assessment based on a use level of 1.13 mg sodium saccharin/kg feed. This use level cannot be considered safe. The estimated use level that would result in a concentration in groundwater below 0.1 µg/L is of 0.022 mg sodium saccharin/kg feed. The available data do not allow to conclude on the potential effect of the degradation product 4-hydroxysaccharin in ground water.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of 27 compounds to provide a milky-vanilla flavour belonging to different chemical groups, when used as sensory additives in feed for all animal species. Fifteen of the 27 compounds were tested in tolerance studies in chickens for fattening, piglets and cattle for fattening. No adverse effects were observed in the tolerance studies at 10-fold the intended level. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the 15 tested compounds were safe for these species at the proposed use level and conclusions were extrapolated to all animal species. For the remaining 12 compounds, read-across from structurally similar compounds tested in tolerance trials and belonging to the same chemical group was applied. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that these 12 compounds were safe for all animal species at the proposed use level. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of the 27 compounds up to the highest levels considered safe for target animals. No new data were submitted on the safety for the user that would allow the FEEDAP Panel to change its previous conclusion for 5-methylhept-2-en-4-one [07.139], 5-methylfurfural [13.001] and 4-phenylbut-3-en-2-one [07.024]. The concentrations considered safe for the target species are unlikely to have detrimental effects on the environment for all the compounds.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture from the fruit of Anethum graveolens L. (dill tincture) when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The product is a â â â â â solution, with a dry matter content of approximately 0.9%. The product contained 0.0247% polyphenols (of which 0.0137% were flavonoids) and 0.003% carvone. Estragole was present at concentrations between the limit of detection and the limit of quantification in the five batches examined. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the dill tincture is safe at the maximum proposed use levels of 200 mg/kg complete feed for horses and 50 mg/kg complete feed for all other animal species. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount which is considered safe when consumed via feed. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of dill tincture up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. Dill tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to estragole cannot be excluded. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. The use of dill tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the fruit of A. graveolens and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
ABSTRACT
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 assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (previously Lactobacillus plantarum) DSM 19457 as a technological additive for use in forage for all animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. There is no evidence to lead the FEEDAP Panel to reconsider its previous conclusions. Thus, the Panel concluded that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety, the additive is not irritant to skin or eyes but owing to its proteinaceous nature, it should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. In the absence of data, no conclusions could be drawn on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, 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 a tincture derived from the fruit of Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss (parsley tincture) when used as a sensory feed additive for all animal species. The product is a â â â â â solution, with a dry matter content of approximately 0.82%. The product contained 0.0198% polyphenols (of which 0.0085% were flavonoids), apiole (0.0083%), elemicin (0.0015%) and myristicin (0.0011%). The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the parsley tincture is safe at the maximum proposed use levels of 200 mg/kg complete feed for horses and 50 mg/kg complete feed for all other animal species. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount which is considered safe when consumed via feed. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of parsley tincture up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. Parsley tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to apiole, elemicin and myristicin cannot be excluded. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. The use of parsley tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the fruit of P. crispum and its preparations were recognised to provide flavour in food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture from the fruit of Foeniculum vulgare Mill. ssp. vulgare var. dulce (sweet fennel tincture) when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The product is a â â â â â solution, with a dry matter content of approximately 2.16%. The product contained 0.0586% polyphenols (of which 0.0052% were flavonoids), anethole (0.0006%), anisaldehyde (0.0035%) and estragole (0.0006%). The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that sweet fennel tincture is safe at the maximum proposed use levels of 200 mg/kg complete feed for horses and 50 mg/kg complete feed for all other animal species. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount which is considered safe when consumed via feed. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of sweet fennel tincture up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. Sweet fennel tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to estragole cannot be excluded. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. F. vulgare is native to Europe. The use of sweet fennel tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the fruit of F. vulgare and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the aerial parts of Anethum graveolens L. (dill herb oil), when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed for dogs and cats. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that dill herb oil is safe at use levels in complete feed of 7 mg/kg for dogs and 5 mg/kg for cats. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the aerial parts of A. graveolens and its preparations are recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from gum resin of Ferula assa-foetida L. (asafoetida oil), when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed for dogs and cats. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the use of asafoetida oil is safe at the proposed conditions of use of 1.5 mg/kg complete feed for dogs and 0.2 mg/kg complete feed for cats. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since F. assa-foetida and its preparations are recognised to flavour food, and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
ABSTRACT
Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the coccidiostat lasalocid A sodium (Avatec® 150G) for chickens for fattening and chickens reared for laying. Taking into account the results of all tolerance studies submitted for the re-evaluation of the additive, the FEEDAP Panel considers that lasalocid A sodium from Avatec® 150G is safe at a maximum content of 90 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening. A margin of safety cannot be established. No conclusion on the safety of lasalocid for chickens reared for laying can be made. Three new floor pen studies showed efficacy of 90 mg lasalocid A sodium/kg complete feed reducing the adverse clinical consequences of an Eimeria infection in chickens for fattening. Considering also the previously reported positive floor pen study and the three positive anticoccidial sensitivity tests, the FEEDAP Panel can conclude on an efficient coccidiostatic level of 90 mg lasalocid A sodium/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening. This conclusion is extended to chickens reared for laying.
ABSTRACT
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 the product Huvezym® neXo 100 G/L containing an endo-1,4-beta xylanase, an endo-1,4-beta-glucanase and a xyloglucan-specific-endo-beta-1,4-glucanase produced by a non-genetically modified strain of Trichoderma citrinoviride (DSM 33578) as a zootechnical additive for feed in all poultry species, ornamental birds and piglets (weaned and suckling). The information regarding the production strain did not allow to confirm its taxonomic identification. The batches used for the characterisation of the final formulations showed compliance with the minimum specifications of the additive in terms of enzyme activities but showed ratios between the enzymes lower than the ones specified for the additive. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the below-described conclusions would apply to the final formulations of the additive as per specifications with xylanase:glucanase, xylanase:xyloglucanase and glucanase:xyloglucanase ratios of 15, 15 and 1, respectively. Based on the data available, the Panel concluded that the additive is safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. Huvezym® neXo 100 G (granulated form) is neither skin corrosive nor eye irritant but should be considered a potential skin sensitiser. Huvezym® neXo 100 L (liquid) is neither skin corrosive nor sensitising and it is not an eye irritant. Due to lack of data, no conclusions can be drawn on the skin irritation of the final formulations of the additive. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substances, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious in chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying and breeding, and all growing poultry and ornamental birds at the minimum intended level of 1,500 EPU, 100 CU and 100 XGU/kg complete feed. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for laying hens and weaned piglets.