Search

Vibrio parahaemolyticus , Vibrio vulnificus and non-O1/non-O139 Vibrio cholerae are the Vibrio spp. of highest relevance for public health in the EU through seafood consumption. Infection with V. parahaemolyticus is associated with the haemolysins thermostable direct haemolysin (TDH) and TDH-related haemolysin (TRH) and mainly leads to acute gastroenteritis. V. vulnificus infections can lead to sepsis and death in susceptible individuals. V. cholerae non-O1/non-O139 can cause mild gastroenteritis or lead to severe infections, including sepsis, in susceptible individuals. The pooled prevalence estimate in seafood is 19.6% (95% CI 13.7-27.4), 6.1% (95% CI 3.0-11.8) and 4.1% (95% CI 2.4-6.9) for V. parahaemolyticus , V. vulnificus and non-choleragenic V. cholerae , respectively. Approximately one out of five V. parahaemolyticus -positive samples contain pathogenic strains. A large spectrum of antimicrobial resistances, some of which are intrinsic, has been found in vibrios isolated from seafood or food-borne infections in Europe. Genes conferring resistance to medically important antimicrobials and associated with mobile genetic elements are increasingly detected in vibrios. Temperature and salinity are the most relevant drivers for Vibrio abundance in the aquatic environment. It is anticipated that the occurrence and levels of the relevant Vibrio spp. in seafood will increase in response to coastal warming and extreme weather events, especially in low-salinity/brackish waters. While some measures, like high-pressure processing, irradiation or depuration reduce the levels of Vibrio spp. in seafood, maintaining the cold chain is important to prevent their growth. Available risk assessments addressed V. parahaemolyticus in various types of seafood and V. vulnificus in raw oysters and octopus. A quantitative microbiological risk assessment relevant in an EU context would be V. parahaemolyticus in bivalve molluscs (oysters), evaluating the effect of mitigations, especially in a climate change scenario. Knowledge gaps related to Vibrio spp. in seafood and aquatic environments are identified and future research needs are prioritised., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) process was developed to provide a safety assessment approach for microorganisms intended for use in food or feed chains. In the period covered by this statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. The TUs in the QPS list were updated based on a verification, against their respective authoritative databases, of the correctness of the names and completeness of synonyms. A new procedure has been established to ensure the TUs are kept up to date in relation to recent taxonomical insights. Of 83 microorganisms notified to EFSA between October 2023 and March 2024 (47 as feed additives, 25 as food enzymes or additives, 11 as novel foods), 75 were not evaluated because: 15 were filamentous fungi, 1 was Enterococcus faecium , 10 were Escherichia coli , 1 was a Streptomyces (all excluded from the QPS evaluation) and 48 were TUs that already have a QPS status. Two of the other eight notifications were already evaluated for a possible QPS status in the previous Panel Statement: Heyndrickxia faecalis (previously Weizmannia faecalis ) and Serratia marcescens . One was notified at genus level so could not be assessed for QPS status. The other five notifications belonging to five TUs were assessed for possible QPS status . Akkermansia muciniphila and Actinomadura roseirufa were still not recommended for QPS status due to safety concerns. Rhizobium radiobacter can be recommended for QPS status with the qualification for production purposes. Microbacterium arborescens and Burkholderia stagnalis cannot be included in the QPS list due to a lack of body of knowledge for its use in the food and feed chain and for B. stagnalis also due to safety concerns. A. roseirufa and B. stagnalis have been excluded from further QPS assessment., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Surveillance data published since 2010, although limited, showed that there is no evidence of zoonotic parasite infection in market quality Atlantic salmon, marine rainbow trout, gilthead seabream, turbot, meagre, Atlantic halibut, common carp and European catfish. No studies were found for greater amberjack, brown trout, African catfish, European eel and pikeperch. Anisakis pegreffii , A. simplex (s. s.) and Cryptocotyle lingua were found in European seabass, Atlantic bluefin tuna and/or cod, and Pseudamphistomum truncatum and Paracoenogonimus ovatus in tench, produced in open offshore cages or flow-through ponds or tanks. It is almost certain that fish produced in closed recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) or flow-through facilities with filtered water intake and exclusively fed heat-treated feed are free of zoonotic parasites. Since the last EFSA opinion, the UV-press and artificial digestion methods have been developed into ISO standards to detect parasites in fish, while new UV-scanning, optical, molecular and OMICs technologies and methodologies have been developed for the detection, visualisation, isolation and/or identification of zoonotic parasites in fish. Freezing and heating continue to be the most efficient methods to kill parasites in fishery products. High-pressure processing may be suitable for some specific products. Pulsed electric field is a promising technology although further development is needed. Ultrasound treatments were not effective. Traditional dry salting of anchovies successfully inactivated Anisakis . Studies on other traditional processes - air-drying and double salting (brine salting plus dry salting) - suggest that anisakids are successfully inactivated, but more data covering these and other parasites in more fish species and products is required to determine if these processes are always effective. Marinade combinations with anchovies have not effectively inactivated anisakids. Natural products, essential oils and plant extracts, may kill parasites but safety and organoleptic data are lacking. Advanced processing techniques for intelligent gutting and trimming are being developed to remove parasites from fish., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Listeria monocytogenes (in the meat, fish and seafood, dairy and fruit and vegetable sectors), Salmonella enterica (in the feed, meat, egg and low moisture food sectors) and Cronobacter sakazakii (in the low moisture food sector) were identified as the bacterial food safety hazards most relevant to public health that are associated with persistence in the food and feed processing environment (FFPE). There is a wide range of subtypes of these hazards involved in persistence in the FFPE. While some specific subtypes are more commonly reported as persistent, it is currently not possible to identify universal markers (i.e. genetic determinants) for this trait. Common risk factors for persistence in the FFPE are inadequate zoning and hygiene barriers; lack of hygienic design of equipment and machines; and inadequate cleaning and disinfection. A well-designed environmental sampling and testing programme is the most effective strategy to identify contamination sources and detect potentially persistent hazards. The establishment of hygienic barriers and measures within the food safety management system, during implementation of hazard analysis and critical control points, is key to prevent and/or control bacterial persistence in the FFPE. Once persistence is suspected in a plant, a 'seek-and-destroy' approach is frequently recommended, including intensified monitoring, the introduction of control measures and the continuation of the intensified monitoring. Successful actions triggered by persistence of L. monocytogenes are described, as well as interventions with direct bactericidal activity. These interventions could be efficient if properly validated, correctly applied and verified under industrial conditions. Perspectives are provided for performing a risk assessment for relevant combinations of hazard and food sector to assess the relative public health risk that can be associated with persistence, based on bottom-up and top-down approaches. Knowledge gaps related to bacterial food safety hazards associated with persistence in the FFPE and priorities for future research are provided., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) process was developed to provide a safety assessment approach for microorganisms intended for use in food or feed chains. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each taxonomic unit (TU), with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge and safety concerns. Safety concerns identified for a TU are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this Statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of 71 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2023 (30 as feed additives, 22 as food enzymes or additives, 7 as novel foods and 12 from plant protection products [PPP]), 61 were not evaluated because: 26 were filamentous fungi, 1 was Enterococcus faecium , 5 were Escherichia coli , 1 was a bacteriophage (all excluded from the QPS evaluation) and 28 were TUs that already have a QPS status. The other 10 notifications belonged to 9 TUs which were evaluated for a possible QPS status: Ensifer adhaerens and Heyndrickxia faecalis did not get the QPS recommendation due to the limited body of knowledge about their occurrence in the food and/or feed chains and Burkholderia ubonensis also due to its ability to generate biologically active compounds with antimicrobial activity; Klebsiella pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens and Pseudomonas putida due to safety concerns. K. pneumoniae is excluded from future QPS evaluations. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'for production purposes only'; Clostridium tyrobutyricum is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'absence of genetic determinants for toxigenic activity'; Candida oleophila has been added as a synonym of Yarrowia lipolytica . The Panel clarifies the extension of the QPS status for genetically modified strains., Competing Interests: If you wish to access the declaration of interests of any expert contributing to an EFSA scientific assessment, please contact interestmanagement@efsa.europa.eu., (© 2024 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of microorganisms intended for use in the food or feed chains. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications' which should be assessed at strain and/or product level by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The generic qualification 'the strains should not harbour any acquired antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes to clinically relevant antimicrobials' applies to all QPS bacterial TUs. The different EFSA risk assessment areas use the same approach to assess the qualification related to AMR genes. In this statement, the terms 'intrinsic' and 'acquired' AMR genes were defined for the purpose of EFSA's risk assessments, and they apply to bacteria used in the food and feed chains. A bioinformatic approach is proposed for demonstrating the 'intrinsic'/'acquired' nature of an AMR gene. All AMR genes that confer resistance towards 'critically important', 'highly important' and 'important' antimicrobials, as defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO), found as hits, need to be considered as hazards (for humans, animals and environment) and need further assessment. Genes identified as responsible for 'intrinsic' resistance could be considered as being of no concern in the frame of the EFSA risk assessment. 'Acquired' AMR genes resulting in a resistant phenotype should be considered as a concern. If the presence of the 'acquired' AMR gene is not leading to phenotypic resistance, further case-by-case assessment is necessary., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of microorganisms, intended for use in the food or feed chains, to support the work of EFSA's Scientific Panels. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge and safety concerns. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this Statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of 38 microorganisms notified to EFSA between October 2022 and March 2023 (inclusive) (28 as feed additives, 5 as food enzymes, food additives and flavourings, 5 as novel foods), 34 were not evaluated because: 8 were filamentous fungi, 4 were Enterococcus faecium and 2 were Escherichia coli (taxonomic units that are excluded from the QPS evaluation) and 20 were taxonomic units (TUs) that already have a QPS status. Three of the other four TUs notified within this period were evaluated for the first time for a possible QPS status: Anaerobutyricum soehngenii , Stutzerimonas stutzeri (former Pseudomonas stutzeri ) and Nannochloropsis oculata . Microorganism strain DSM 11798 has also been notified in 2015 and as its taxonomic unit is notified as a strain not a species, it is not suitable for the QPS approach. A. soehngenii and N. oculata are not recommended for the QPS status due to a limited body of knowledge of its use in the food and feed chains. S. stutzeri is not recommended for inclusion in the QPS list based on safety concerns and limited information about the exposure of animals and humans through the food and feed chains., (© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of microorganisms, intended for use in the food or feed chains, to support the work of EFSA's Scientific Panels. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge and safety concerns. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this Statement, new information was found leading to the withdrawal of the qualification 'absence of aminoglycoside production ability' for Bacillus velezensis. The qualification for Bacillus paralicheniformis was changed to 'absence of bacitracin production ability'. For the other TUs, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of 52 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2022 (inclusive), 48 were not evaluated because: 7 were filamentous fungi, 3 were Enterococcus faecium , 2 were Escherichia coli , 1 was Streptomyces spp., and 35 were taxonomic units (TUs) that already have a QPS status. The other four TUs notified within this period, and one notified previously as a different species, which was recently reclassified, were evaluated for the first time for a possible QPS status: Xanthobacter spp. could not be assessed because it was not identified to the species level; Geobacillus thermodenitrificans is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'absence of toxigenic activity'. Streptoccus oralis is not recommended for QPS status. Ogataea polymorpha is proposed for QPS status with the qualification 'for production purposes only'. Lactiplantibacillus argentoratensis (new species) is included in the QPS list., (© 2023 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

The impact of dry-ageing of beef and wet-ageing of beef, pork and lamb on microbiological hazards and spoilage bacteria was examined and current practices are described. As 'standard fresh' and wet-aged meat use similar processes these were differentiated based on duration. In addition to a description of the different stages, data were collated on key parameters (time, temperature, pH and a w ) using a literature survey and questionnaires. The microbiological hazards that may be present in all aged meats included Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC), Salmonella spp., Staphylococcus aureus , Listeria monocytogenes , enterotoxigenic Yersinia spp., Campylobacter spp. and Clostridium spp. Moulds, such as Aspergillus spp. and Penicillium spp., may produce mycotoxins when conditions are favourable but may be prevented by ensuring a meat surface temperature of -0.5 to 3.0°C, with a relative humidity (RH) of 75-85% and an airflow of 0.2-0.5 m/s for up to 35 days. The main meat spoilage bacteria include Pseudomonas spp . , Lactobacillus spp. Enterococcus spp., Weissella spp., Brochothrix spp., Leuconostoc spp., Lactobacillus spp., Shewanella spp. and Clostridium spp. Under current practices, the ageing of meat may have an impact on the load of microbiological hazards and spoilage bacteria as compared to standard fresh meat preparation. Ageing under defined and controlled conditions can achieve the same or lower loads of microbiological hazards and spoilage bacteria than the variable log 10 increases predicted during standard fresh meat preparation. An approach was used to establish the conditions of time and temperature that would achieve similar or lower levels of L. monocytogenes and Yersinia enterocolitica (pork only) and lactic acid bacteria (representing spoilage bacteria) as compared to standard fresh meat. Finally, additional control activities were identified that would further assure the microbial safety of dry-aged beef, based on recommended best practice and the outputs of the equivalence assessment., (© 2023 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of microorganisms, intended for use in the food or feed chains, to support the work of EFSA's Scientific Panels. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge, safety concerns and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of the 50 microorganisms notified to EFSA in October 2021 to March 2022 (inclusive), 41 were not evaluated: 10 filamentous fungi, 1 Enterococcus faecium , 1 Clostridium butyricum, 3 Escherichia coli and 1 Streptomyces spp. because are excluded from QPS evaluation, and 25 TUs that have already a QPS status. Nine notifications, corresponding to seven TUs were evaluated: four of these, Streptococcus salivarius, Companilactobacillus formosensis, Pseudonocardia autotrophica and Papiliotrema terrestris , being evaluated for the first time. The other three, Microbacterium foliorum, Pseudomonas fluorescens and Ensifer adhaerens were re-assessed. None of these TUs were recommended for QPS status: Ensifer adhaerens, Microbacterium foliorum, Companilactobacillus formosensis and Papiliotrema terrestris due to a limited body of knowledge , Streptococcus salivarius due to its ability to cause bacteraemia and systemic infection that results in a variety of morbidities, Pseudonocardia autotrophica due to lack of body of knowledge and uncertainty on the safety of biologically active compounds which can be produced, and Pseudomonas fluorescens due to possible safety concerns ., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

High-pressure processing (HPP) is a non-thermal treatment in which, for microbial inactivation, foods are subjected to isostatic pressures (P) of 400-600 MPa with common holding times (t) from 1.5 to 6 min. The main factors that influence the efficacy (log 10 reduction of vegetative microorganisms) of HPP when applied to foodstuffs are intrinsic (e.g. water activity and pH), extrinsic (P and t) and microorganism-related (type, taxonomic unit, strain and physiological state). It was concluded that HPP of food will not present any additional microbial or chemical food safety concerns when compared to other routinely applied treatments (e.g. pasteurisation). Pathogen reductions in milk/colostrum caused by the current HPP conditions applied by the industry are lower than those achieved by the legal requirements for thermal pasteurisation. However, HPP minimum requirements (P/t combinations) could be identified to achieve specific log 10 reductions of relevant hazards based on performance criteria (PC) proposed by international standard agencies (5-8 log 10 reductions). The most stringent HPP conditions used industrially (600 MPa, 6 min) would achieve the above-mentioned PC, except for Staphylococcus aureus . Alkaline phosphatase (ALP), the endogenous milk enzyme that is widely used to verify adequate thermal pasteurisation of cows' milk, is relatively pressure resistant and its use would be limited to that of an overprocessing indicator. Current data are not robust enough to support the proposal of an appropriate indicator to verify the efficacy of HPP under the current HPP conditions applied by the industry. Minimum HPP requirements to reduce Listeria monocytogenes levels by specific log 10 reductions could be identified when HPP is applied to ready-to-eat (RTE) cooked meat products, but not for other types of RTE foods. These identified minimum requirements would result in the inactivation of other relevant pathogens ( Salmonella and Escherichia coli ) in these RTE foods to a similar or higher extent., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a generic pre-evaluation of the safety of biological agents. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge and safety concerns. Safety concerns are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. The QPS list was updated in relation to the revised taxonomy of the genus Bacillus , to synonyms of yeast species and for the qualifications 'absence of resistance to antimycotics' and 'only for production purposes'. Lactobacillus cellobiosus has been reclassified as Limosilactobacillus fermentum . In the period covered by this statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS taxonomic units (TU)s. Of the 70 microorganisms notified to EFSA, 64 were not evaluated: 11 filamentous fungi, one oomycete, one Clostridium butyricum , one Enterococcus faecium , five Escherichia coli , one Streptomyces sp., one Bacillus nakamurai and 43 TUs that already had a QPS status. Six notifications, corresponding to six TUs were evaluated: Paenibacillus lentus was reassessed because an update was requested for the current mandate. Enterococcus lactis synonym Enterococcus xinjiangensis , Aurantiochytrium mangrovei synonym Schizochytrium mangrovei , Schizochytrium aggregatum , Chlamydomonas reinhardtii synonym Chlamydomonas smithii and Haematococcus lacustris synonym Haematococcus pluvialis were assessed for the first time. The following TUs were not recommended for QPS status: P. lentus due to a limited body of knowledge, E. lactis synonym E. xinjiangensis due to potential safety concerns, A. mangrovei synonym S. mangrovei , S. aggregatum and C. reinhardtii synonym C. smithii , due to lack of a body of knowledge on its occurrence in the food and feed chain. H. lacustris synonym H. pluvialis is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'for production purposes only'., (© 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.)

The European Commission requested EFSA to assess if different thermal processes achieve a 5 log 10 reduction in Enterococcus faecalis or Salmonella Senftenberg (775W) and (if relevant) a 3 log 10 reduction in thermoresistant viruses (e.g. Parvovirus ) as well as if different chemical processes achieve a 3 log 10 reduction of eggs of Ascaris sp., in eight groups of Category 2 and 3 derived products and animal by-products (ABP). These included (1) ash derived from incineration, co-incineration and combustion; (2) glycerine derived from the production of biodiesel and renewable fuels; (3) other materials derived from the production of biodiesel and renewable fuels; (4) hides and skins; (5) wool and hair; (6) feathers and down; (7) pig bristles; and (8) horns, horn products, hooves and hoof products. Data on the presence of viral hazards and on thermal and chemical inactivation of the targeted indicator microorganisms and biological hazards under relevant processing conditions were extracted via extensive literature searches. The evidence was assessed via expert knowledge elicitation. The certainty that the required log 10 reductions in the most resistant indicator microorganisms or biological hazards will be achieved for each of the eight groups of materials mentioned above by the thermal and/or chemical processes was (1) 99-100% for the two processes assessed; (2) 98-100% in Category 2 ABP, at least 90-99% in Category 3 ABP; (3) 90-99% in Category 2 ABP; at least 66-90% in Category 3 ABP; (4) 10-66% and 33-66%; (5) 1-33% and 10-50%; (6) 66-90%; (7) 33-66% and 50-95%; (8) 66-95%, respectively. Data generation on the occurrence and reduction of biological hazards by thermal and/or chemical methods in these materials and on the characterisation of the usage pathways of ABP as organic fertilisers/soil improvers is recommended., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The European Commission requested EFSA to assess, in collaboration with EMA, the specific concentrations of antimicrobials resulting from cross-contamination in non-target feed for food-producing animals below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in microbial agents relevant for human and animal health, as well as the levels of the antimicrobials which could have a growth promotion/increase yield effect. The assessment was performed for 24 antimicrobial active substances, as specified in the mandate. This scientific opinion describes the methodology used, and the main associated data gaps and uncertainties. To estimate the antimicrobial levels in the non-target feed that would not result in emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance, a model was developed. This 'Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration' (FARSC) model is based on the minimal selective concentration (MSC), or the predicted MSC (PMSC) if MSC for the most susceptible bacterial species is unavailable, the fraction of antimicrobial dose available for exposure to microorganisms in the large intestine or rumen (considering pharmacokinetic parameters), the daily faecal output or rumen volume and the daily feed intake. Currently, lack of data prevents the establishment of PMSC and/or FARSC for several antimicrobials and animal species. To address growth promotion, data from an extensive literature search were used. Specific assessments of the different substances grouped by antimicrobial classes are addressed in separate scientific opinions. General conclusions and recommendations were made., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of colistin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of colistin in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of tilmicosin, tylosin and tylvalosin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield, were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tilmicosin and tylosin, whilst for tylvalosin no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these three antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of tiamulin and valnemulin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tiamulin, while for valnemulin no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these two antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of lincomycin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of lincomycin in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for lincomycin., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline and doxycycline in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. The FARSC for these four tetracyclines was estimated. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for tetracycline, chlortetracycline, oxytetracycline, whilst for doxycycline no suitable data for the assessment were available. Uncertainties and data gaps associated with the levels reported were addressed. It was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of florfenicol and thiamphenicol in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield, were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. The FARSC for florfenicol was estimated. However, due to the lack of data, the calculation of the FARSC for thiamphenicol was not possible until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for florfenicol, whilst for thiamphenicol no suitable data for the assessment were available. Uncertainties and data gaps associated to the levels reported were addressed. For florfenicol, it was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC, whereas for thiamphenicol, the recommendation was to generate the data required to fill the gaps which prevented the FARSC calculation., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of sulfonamides in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data are available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were identified for three sulfonamides: sulfamethazine, sulfathiazole and sulfamerazine. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of amoxicillin and penicillin V in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for amoxicillin, whilst for penicillin V no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these two antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of flumequine and oxolinic acid in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data are available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. No suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of trimethoprim in non-target feed for food-producing animals below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. The FARSC for trimethoprim was estimated. Uncertainties and data gaps associated to the levels reported were addressed. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. No suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC for trimethoprim., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of apramycin, paromomycin, neomycin and spectinomycin in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield, were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for these antimicrobials, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for apramycin and neomycin, whilst for paromomycin and spectinomycin, no suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these four antimicrobials., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The specific concentrations of amprolium in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for amprolium, it was not possible to conclude the assessment. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of amprolium in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. The lack of antibacterial activity at clinically relevant concentrations for amprolium suggests that further studies relating to bacterial resistance are not a priority., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of biological agents, intended for addition to food or feed, to support the work of EFSA's Scientific Panels. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge, safety concerns and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Schizochytrium limacinum , which is a synonym for Aurantiochytrium limacinum , was added to the QPS list. Of the 78 microorganisms notified to EFSA between October 2020 and March 2021, 71 were excluded; 16 filamentous fungi, 1 Dyella spp., 1 Enterococcus faecium , 7 Escherichia coli , 1 Streptomyces spp., 1 Schizochytrium spp. and 44 TUs that had been previously evaluated. Seven TUs were evaluated: Corynebacterium stationis and Kodamaea ohmeri were re-assessed because an update was requested for the current mandate. Anoxybacillus caldiproteolyticus , Bacillus paralicheniformis , Enterobacter hormaechei, Eremothecium ashbyi and Lactococcus garvieae were assessed for the first time. The following TUs were not recommended for QPS status: A. caldiproteolyticus due to the lack of a body of knowledge in relation to its use in the food or feed chain, E. hormaechei, L. garvieae and K. ohmeri due to their pathogenic potential , E. ashbyi and C. stationis due to a lack of body of knowledge on their occurrence in the food and feed chain and to their pathogenic potential. B. paralicheniformis was recommended for the QPS status with the qualification 'absence of toxigenic activity' and 'absence of genetic information to synthesize bacitracin'., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

A risk-based approach was used to develop guidance to be followed by food business operators (FBOs) when deciding on food information relating to storage conditions and/or time limits for consumption after opening a food package and thawing of frozen foods. After opening the package, contamination may occur, introducing new pathogens into the food and the intrinsic (e.g. pH and a w ), extrinsic (e.g. temperature and gas atmosphere) and implicit (e.g. interactions with competing background microbiota) factors may change, affecting microbiological food safety. Setting a time limit for consumption after opening the package (secondary shelf-life) is complex in view of the many influencing factors and information gaps. A decision tree (DT) was developed to assist FBOs in deciding whether the time limit for consumption after opening, due to safety reasons, is potentially shorter than the initial 'best before' or 'use by' date of the product in its unopened package. For products where opening the package leads to a change of the type of pathogenic microorganisms present in the food and/or factors increasing their growth compared to the unopened product, a shorter time limit for consumption after opening would be appropriate. Freezing prevents the growth of pathogens, however, most pathogenic microorganisms may survive frozen storage, recover during thawing and then grow and/or produce toxins in the food, if conditions are favourable. Moreover, additional contamination may occur from hands, contact surfaces or contamination from other foods and utensils. Good practices for thawing should, from a food safety point of view, minimise growth of and contamination by pathogens between the food being thawed and other foods and/or contact surfaces, especially when removing the food from the package during thawing. Best practices for thawing foods are presented to support FBOs., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

A new alternative method for the production of biodiesel from rendered fat, including animal by-product (ABP) Category 1 tallow, was evaluated. The method consists of a conversion phase, based on esterification and transesterification in a single step (at temperature ≥ 200°C, pressure ≥ 70 bar with a retention time ≥ 15 min), using MgO as a catalyst and in the presence of methanol (10-15%), followed by vacuum distillation (at ≥ 150°C, ≤ 10 mbar) of the end-product, biodiesel and the co-product, glycerine. Prions (PrP S c ), which are abnormal isoforms of the prion protein, were considered by the applicant to be the most resistant hazard. In accordance with previous EFSA Opinions and current expert evaluation, a reduction in prion infectivity, or detectable PrP S c , of at least 6 log 10 should be achieved for the process to be considered equivalent to the processing method laid down in the Regulation (EU) No 142/2011. Published data from an experimental replication of the conversion step of the biodiesel production process under consideration were provided, which showed an at least 6 log 10 reduction in detectable PrP S c , by Western blot, in tallow that had been spiked with murine and human prion strains. In addition, it was demonstrated that the presence of methanol does not affect the recovery or detection of PrP S c from a biodiesel substrate. Based on scientific literature, the vacuum distillation step has been shown to be capable of achieving an additional 3 log 10 reduction in PrP S c . Therefore, the proposed alternative method is considered to be at least equivalent to the processing method laid down in the legislation for the production of biodiesel from raw materials including Category 1 ABP., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Superchilling entails lowering the fish temperature to between the initial freezing point of the fish and about 1-2°C lower. The temperature of superchilled fresh fishery products (SFFP) in boxes without ice was compared to that of products subject to the currently authorised practice in boxes with ice (CFFP) under the same conditions of on-land storage and/or transport. A heat transfer model was developed and made available as a tool to identify under which initial configurations of SFFP the fish temperature, at any time of storage/transport, is lower or equal to CFFP. A minimum degree of superchilling, corresponding to an ice fraction in the fish matrix of SFFP equal or higher than the proportion of ice added per mass of fish in CFFP, will ensure with 99-100% certainty (almost certain) that the fish temperature of SFFP and the consequent increase of relevant hazards will be lower or equal to that of CFFP. In practice, the degree of superchilling can be estimated using the fish temperature after superchilling and its initial freezing point, which are subject to uncertainties. The tool can be used as part of 'safety-by-design' approach, with the reliability of its outcome being dependent on the accuracy of the input data. An evaluation of methods capable of detecting whether a previously frozen fish is commercially presented as 'superchilled' was carried out based on, amongst others, their applicability for different fish species, ability to differentiate fresh fish from fish frozen at different temperatures, use as a stand-alone method, ease of use and classification performance. The methods that were considered 'fit for purpose' are Hydroxyacyl-coenzyme A dehydrogenase (HADH) test, α-glucosidase test, histology, ultraviolet-visible-near-infrared (UV-VIS/NIR) spectroscopy and hyperspectral imaging. These methods would benefit from standardisation, including the establishment of threshold values or classification algorithms to provide a practical routine test., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach was developed to provide a regularly updated generic pre-evaluation of the safety of biological agents, intended for addition to food or feed, to support the work of EFSA's Scientific Panels. It is based on an assessment of published data for each agent, with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible, confirmed at strain or product level, and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of the 36 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2020, 33 were excluded; seven filamentous fungi (including Aureobasidium pullulans based on recent taxonomic insights), one Clostridium butyricum , one Enterococcus faecium , three Escherichia coli , one Streptomyces spp. and 20 TUs that had been previously evaluated. Three TUs were evaluated; Methylorubrum extorquens and Mycobacterium aurum for the first time and Bacillus circulans was re-assessed because an update was requested in relation to a new mandate. M. extorquens and M. aurum are not recommended for QPS status due to the lack of a body of knowledge in relation to use in the food or feed chain and M. aurum, due to uncertainty concerning its pathogenicity potential. B. circulans was recommended for QPS status with the qualifications for 'production purposes only' and 'absence of cytotoxic activity'., (© 2021 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The potential effects of a 24 or 72-h delay in post-mortem inspection (PMI) of ungulates on public health and monitoring of animal health and welfare was evaluated. The assessment used a survey of meat inspectors, expert opinion, literature search and a stochastic model for Salmonella detection sensitivity. Disease detection sensitivity at a delayed PMI is expected to reduce detection sensitivity to a variable extent, depending on the hazard and on the signs/lesions and organs involved. No reduction is expected for Trichinella detection in meat from susceptible animal species and any decrease in detection of transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) will not exceed the current tolerance for fallen stock. A 24-h delay in PMI could result in a small reduction in sensitivity of detection for tuberculosis, echinococcosis and cysticercosis. A greater reduction is expected for the detection of pyaemia and Rift valley fever. For the detection of Salmonella , the median model estimates are a reduction of sensitivity of 66.5% (90% probability interval (PI) 0.08-99.75%) after 24-h delay and 94% (90% PI 0.83-100%) after 72-h delay of PMI. Laboratory testing for tuberculosis following a sampling delay of 24-72 h could result in no, or a moderate, decrease in detection depending on the method of confirmation used (PCR, culture, histopathology). For chemical contaminants, a delay in meat inspection of 24 or 72 h is expected to have no impact on the effectiveness of detection of persistent organic pollutants and metals. However, for certain pharmacologically active substances, there will be a reduced effectiveness to detect some of these substances due to potential degradation in the available matrices (tissues and organs) and the non-availability of specific preferred matrices of choice., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

A risk-based approach was developed to be followed by food business operators (FBO) when deciding on the type of date marking (i.e. 'best before' date or 'use by' date), setting of shelf-life (i.e. time) and the related information on the label to ensure food safety. The decision on the type of date marking needs to be taken on a product-by-product basis, considering the relevant hazards, product characteristics, processing and storage conditions. The hazard identification is food product-specific and should consider pathogenic microorganisms capable of growing in prepacked temperature-controlled foods under reasonably foreseeable conditions. The intrinsic (e.g. pH and a w ), extrinsic (e.g. temperature and gas atmosphere) and implicit (e.g. interactions with competing background microbiota) factors of the food determine which pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms can grow in the food during storage until consumption. A decision tree was developed to assist FBOs in deciding the type of date marking for a certain food product. When setting the shelf-life, the FBO needs to consider reasonably foreseeable conditions of distribution, storage and use of the food. Key steps of a case-by-case procedure to determine and validate the shelf-life period are: (i) identification of the relevant pathogenic/spoilage microorganism and its initial level, (ii) characterisation of the factors of the food affecting the growth behaviour and (iii) assessment of the growth behaviour of the pathogenic/spoilage microorganism in the food product during storage until consumption. Due to the variability between food products and consumer habits, it was not appropriate to present indicative time limits for food donated or marketed past the 'best before' date. Recommendations were provided relating to training activities and support, using 'reasonably foreseeable conditions', collecting time-temperature data during distribution, retail and domestic storage of foods and developing Appropriate Levels of Protection and/or Food Safety Objectives for food-pathogen combinations., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

EFSA was requested to estimate the cattle bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) risk (C-, L- and H-BSE) posed by ruminant collagen and gelatine produced from raw material fit for human consumption, or from material classified as Category 3 animal by-products (ABP), to be used in feed intended for non-ruminant animals, including aquaculture animals. Three risk pathways (RP) were identified by which cattle could be exposed to ruminant feed cross-contaminated with ruminant collagen or gelatine: 1) recycled former foodstuffs produced in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 (RP1), 2) technological or nutritional additives or 3) compound feed, produced either in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 (RP2a) or Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 (RP2b). A probabilistic model was developed to estimate the BSE infectivity load measured in cattle oral ID 50 (CoID 50 )/kg, in the gelatine produced from the bones and hide of one infected animal older than 30 months with clinical BSE (worst-case scenario). The amount of BSE infectivity (50th percentile estimate) in a member state (MS) with negligible risk status was 7.6 × 10 -2 CoID 50 /kg, and 3.1 × 10 -4 CoID 50 /kg in a MS with controlled risk status. The assessment considered the potential contamination pathways and the model results (including uncertainties) regarding the current epidemiological situation in the EU and current statutory controls. Given the estimated amount of BSE infectivity to which cattle would be exposed in a single year, and even if all the estimated undetected BSE cases in the EU were used for the production of collagen or gelatine (either using raw materials fit for human consumption or Category 3 ABP raw materials), it was concluded that the probability that no new case of BSE in the cattle population would be generated through any of the three RP is 99-100% (almost certain)., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Two alternative methods for the production of compost from certain category 3 animal by-products (catering waste and processed foodstuffs of animal origin) were assessed. The first proposed a minimum temperature of 55°C for 72 h; the second 60°C for 48 h, each with a maximum particle size of 200 mm. The proposed composting processes were assessed by the BIOHAZ Panel for their efficacy to achieve a reduction of 5 log 10 of Enterococcus faecalis or Salmonella Senftenberg (775W, H 2 S negative) and a 3 log 10 reduction of the infectivity titre of thermoresistant viruses, such as parvovirus, in the composted material, as set out in Annex V, Chapter 3, Section 2 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011. The assessment of the BIOHAZ Panel exclusively focused on the ABP raw materials (catering waste and processed foodstuffs) intended for human consumption. The applicant did not provide any validation experiments with direct measurement of the reduction of viability of endogenous indicators or spiked surrogate bacteria. However, from thermal inactivation parameters reported in the literature, it can be concluded that the proposed composting standards can achieve at least a 5 log 10 reduction of Enterococcus faecalis or Salmonella Senftenberg 775W. The applicant did not consider thermoresistant viruses as a relevant hazard and therefore did not provide any data from direct measurements of the reduction of infectivity of spiked thermoresistant viruses, nor provide data from validation studies undertaken at national level or data from literature supporting the efficacy of the proposed composting standards on thermoresistant viruses. However, thermoresistant viruses should be considered to be a relevant hazard in this context and validation data should have been provided accordingly. The BIOHAZ Panel considers that the evidence provided by the applicant does not demonstrate that the requirements of Annex V, Chapter 3, Section 2 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 are achieved., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a generic safety evaluation for biological agents to support EFSA's Scientific Panels. It is based on an assessment of the taxonomic identity, the body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are where possible to be confirmed at strain or product level, reflected by 'qualifications'. No new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs of the 39 microorganisms notified to EFSA between October 2019 and March 2020, 33 were excluded, including five filamentous fungi, five Escherichia coli , two Enterococcus faecium , two Streptomyces spp. and 19 TUs already evaluated. Six TUs were evaluated. Akkermansia muciniphila was not recommended for QPS status due to safety concerns. Clostridium butyricum was not recommended because some strains contain pathogenicity factors. This TU was excluded for further QPS evaluation. Galdieria sulphuraria and Pseudomonas chlororaphis were also rejected due to a lack of body of knowledge. The QPS status of Corynebacterium ammoniagenes (with the qualification 'for production purposes only') and of Komagataella pastoris (with the qualification 'for enzyme production') was confirmed. In relation to the taxonomic revision of the Lactobacillus genus, previously designated Lactobacillus species will be reassigned to the new species and both the old and new names will be retained in the QPS list., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The 2011 EFSA opinion on Campylobacter was updated using more recent scientific data. The relative risk reduction in EU human campylobacteriosis attributable to broiler meat was estimated for on-farm control options using Population Attributable Fractions (PAF) for interventions that reduce Campylobacter flock prevalence, updating the modelling approach for interventions that reduce caecal concentrations and reviewing scientific literature. According to the PAF analyses calculated for six control options, the mean relative risk reductions that could be achieved by adoption of each of these six control options individually are estimated to be substantial but the width of the confidence intervals of all control options indicates a high degree of uncertainty in the specific risk reduction potentials. The updated model resulted in lower estimates of impact than the model used in the previous opinion. A 3-log 10 reduction in broiler caecal concentrations was estimated to reduce the relative EU risk of human campylobacteriosis attributable to broiler meat by 58% compared to an estimate larger than 90% in the previous opinion. Expert Knowledge Elicitation was used to rank control options, for weighting and integrating different evidence streams and assess uncertainties. Medians of the relative risk reductions of selected control options had largely overlapping probability intervals, so the rank order was uncertain: vaccination 27% (90% probability interval (PI) 4-74%); feed and water additives 24% (90% PI 4-60%); discontinued thinning 18% (90% PI 5-65%); employing few and well-trained staff 16% (90% PI 5-45%); avoiding drinkers that allow standing water 15% (90% PI 4-53%); addition of disinfectants to drinking water 14% (90% PI 3-36%); hygienic anterooms 12% (90% PI 3-50%); designated tools per broiler house 7% (90% PI 1-18%). It is not possible to quantify the effects of combined control activities because the evidence-derived estimates are inter-dependent and there is a high level of uncertainty associated with each., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

On-land transport/storage of fresh fishery products (FFP) for up to 3 days in 'tubs' of three-layered poly-ethylene filled with freshwater and ice was compared to the currently authorised practice (fish boxes of high-density poly-ethylene filled with ice). The impact on the survival and growth of biological hazards in fish and the histamine production in fish species associated with a high amount of histidine was assessed. In different modelling scenarios, the FFP are stored on-board in freshwater or seawater/ice (in tubs) and once on-land they are 'handled' (i.e. sorted or gutted and/or filleted) and transferred to either tubs or boxes. The temperature of the FFP was assumed to be the most influential factor affecting relevant hazards. Under reasonably foreseeable 'abusive' scenarios and using a conservative modelling approach, the growth of the relevant hazards (i.e. Listeria monocytogenes , Aeromonas spp. and non-proteolytic Clostridium botulinum ), is expected to be < 0.2 log 10 units higher in tubs than in boxes after 3 days when the initial temperature of the fish is 0°C ('keeping' process). Starting at 7°C ('cooling-keeping' process), the expected difference in the growth potential is higher (< 1 log 10 for A. hydrophila and < 0.5 log 10 for the other two hazards) due to the poorer cooling capacity of water and ice (tub) compared with ice (box). The survival of relevant hazards is not or is negligibly impacted. Histamine formation due to growth of Morganella psychrotolerans under the 'keeping' or 'cooling-keeping' process can be up to 0.4 ppm and 1.5 ppm higher, respectively, in tubs as compared to boxes after 3 days, without reaching the legal limit of 100 ppm. The water uptake associated with the storage of the FFP in tubs (which may be up to 6%) does not make a relevant contribution to the differences in microbial growth potential compared to boxes., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

A multi-country outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes ST6 linked to blanched frozen vegetables (bfV) took place in the EU (2015-2018). Evidence of food-borne outbreaks shows that L. monocytogenes is the most relevant pathogen associated with bfV. The probability of illness per serving of uncooked bfV, for the elderly (65-74 years old) population, is up to 3,600 times greater than cooked bfV and very likely lower than any of the evaluated ready-to-eat food categories. The main factors affecting contamination and growth of L. monocytogenes in bfV during processing are the hygiene of the raw materials and process water; the hygienic conditions of the food processing environment (FPE); and the time/Temperature (t/T) combinations used for storage and processing (e.g. blanching, cooling). Relevant factors after processing are the intrinsic characteristics of the bfV, the t/T combinations used for thawing and storage and subsequent cooking conditions, unless eaten uncooked. Analysis of the possible control options suggests that application of a complete HACCP plan is either not possible or would not further enhance food safety. Instead, specific prerequisite programmes (PRP) and operational PRP activities should be applied such as cleaning and disinfection of the FPE, water control, t/T control and product information and consumer awareness. The occurrence of low levels of L. monocytogenes at the end of the production process (e.g. < 10 CFU/g) would be compatible with the limit of 100 CFU/g at the moment of consumption if any labelling recommendations are strictly followed (i.e. 24 h at 5°C). Under reasonably foreseeable conditions of use (i.e. 48 h at 12°C), L. monocytogenes levels need to be considerably lower (not detected in 25 g). Routine monitoring programmes for L. monocytogenes should be designed following a risk-based approach and regularly revised based on trend analysis, being FPE monitoring a key activity in the frozen vegetable industry., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

An alternative method for the production of biodiesel from processed fats derived from Category 1, 2 and 3 animal by-products was assessed. The method is based on a pre-cleaning process, acidic esterification/transesterification of tallow using 1.5% methanesulfonic acid w/w; 140°C; 5.5 bar absolute pressure (bara); 4 h, followed by fractional distillation. The application focuses on the capacity of the alternative method to inactivate prions. Given the limitations that biodiesel presents for direct measurement of prion infectivity, the BIOHAZ Panel considered, based on the outcome of previous EFSA Opinions and current expert evaluation, that a reduction of 6 log 10 in detectable PrP S c signal would be necessary to consider the process at least equivalent to previously approved methods for Category 1 animal by-products. This is in addition to the inactivation achieved by the pressure sterilisation method applied before the application of any biodiesel production method. Experimental data were provided via ad hoc studies commissioned to quantify the reduction in detectable PrP S c in material spiked with scrapie hamster strain 263K, as measured by western blot, for the first two steps, with distillation assumed to provide at least an additional 3 log 10 reduction, based on published data. Despite the intrinsic methodological caveats of the detection of PrP S c in laboratory studies, the BIOHAZ Panel considers that the alternative method, including the final fractional distillation, is capable of achieving the required 6 log 10 reduction of the strain 263K PrP S c signal. Therefore, the method under assessment can be considered at least equivalent to the processing methods previously approved for the production of biodiesel from all categories of animal by-product raw materials. It is recommended to check the feasibility of the proposed HACCP plan by recording the main processing parameters for a certain time period under real industrial conditions., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a safety pre-assessment within EFSA for microorganisms. Strains belonging to QPS taxonomic units (TUs) still require an assessment based on a specific data package, but QPS status facilitates fast track evaluation. QPS TUs are unambiguously defined biological agents assessed for the body of knowledge, their safety and their end use. Safety concerns are, where possible, to be confirmed at strain or product level, and reflected as 'qualifications'. Qualifications need to be evaluated at strain level by the respective EFSA units. The lowest QPS TU is the species level for bacteria, yeasts and protists/algae, and the family for viruses. The QPS concept is also applicable to genetically modified microorganisms used for production purposes if the recipient strain qualifies for the QPS status, and if the genetic modification does not indicate a concern. Based on the actual body of knowledge and/or an ambiguous taxonomic position, the following TUs were excluded from the QPS assessment: filamentous fungi, oomycetes, streptomycetes , Enterococcus faecium , Escherichia coli and bacteriophages. The list of QPS-recommended biological agents was reviewed and updated in the current opinion and therefore now becomes the valid list. For this update, reports on the safety of previously assessed microorganisms, including bacteria, yeasts and viruses (the latter only when used for plant protection purposes) were reviewed, following an Extensive Literature Search strategy. All TUs previously recommended for 2016 QPS list had their status reconfirmed as well as their qualifications. The TUs related to the new notifications received since the 2016 QPS opinion was periodically evaluated for QPS status in the Statements of the BIOHAZ Panel, and the QPS list was also periodically updated. In total, 14 new TUs received a QPS status between 2017 and 2019: three yeasts, eight bacteria and three algae/protists., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Qualified presumption of safety (QPS) was developed to provide a generic safety evaluation for biological agents to support EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance are assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are where possible to be confirmed at strain or product level, reflected by 'qualifications'. No new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA was updated with 54 biological agents, received between April and September 2019; 23 already had QPS status, 14 were excluded from the QPS exercise (7 filamentous fungi, 6 Escherichia coli , Sphingomonas paucimobilis which was already evaluated). Seventeen, corresponding to 16 TUs, were evaluated for possible QPS status, fourteen of these for the first time, and Protaminobacter rubrum , evaluated previously, was excluded because it is not a valid species. Eight TUs are recommended for QPS status. Lactobacillus parafarraginis and Zygosaccharomyces rouxii are recommended to be included in the QPS list. Parageobacillus thermoglucosidasius and Paenibacillus illinoisensis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification 'for production purposes only' and absence of toxigenic potential. Bacillus velezensis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification 'absence of toxigenic potential and the absence of aminoglycoside production ability'. Cupriavidus necator, Aurantiochytrium limacinum and Tetraselmis chuii can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification 'production purposes only'. Pantoea ananatis is not recommended for the QPS list due to lack of body of knowledge in relation to its pathogenicity potential for plants. Corynebacterium stationis, Hamamotoa singularis , Rhodococcus aetherivorans and Rhodococcus ruber cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to lack of body of knowledge. Kodamaea ohmeri cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to safety concerns., (© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

This Opinion considers the application of whole genome sequencing (WGS) and metagenomics for outbreak investigation, source attribution and risk assessment of food-borne pathogens. WGS offers the highest level of bacterial strain discrimination for food-borne outbreak investigation and source-attribution as well as potential for more precise hazard identification, thereby facilitating more targeted risk assessment and risk management. WGS improves linking of sporadic cases associated with different food products and geographical regions to a point source outbreak and can facilitate epidemiological investigations, allowing also the use of previously sequenced genomes. Source attribution may be favoured by improved identification of transmission pathways, through the integration of spatial-temporal factors and the detection of multidirectional transmission and pathogen-host interactions. Metagenomics has potential, especially in relation to the detection and characterisation of non-culturable, difficult-to-culture or slow-growing microorganisms, for tracking of hazard-related genetic determinants and the dynamic evaluation of the composition and functionality of complex microbial communities. A SWOT analysis is provided on the use of WGS and metagenomics for Salmonella and Shigatoxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) serotyping and the identification of antimicrobial resistance determinants in bacteria. Close agreement between phenotypic and WGS-based genotyping data has been observed. WGS provides additional information on the nature and localisation of antimicrobial resistance determinants and on their dissemination potential by horizontal gene transfer, as well as on genes relating to virulence and biological fitness. Interoperable data will play a major role in the future use of WGS and metagenomic data. Capacity building based on harmonised, quality controlled operational systems within European laboratories and worldwide is essential for the investigation of cross-border outbreaks and for the development of international standardised risk assessments of food-borne microorganisms., (© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) procedure was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) 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 TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA from applications for market authorisation was updated with 47 biological agents, received between October 2018 and March 2019. Of these, 19 already had QPS status, 20 were excluded from the QPS exercise by the previous QPS mandate (11 filamentous fungi) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (9 notifications of Escherichia coli ) . Sphingomonas elodea, Gluconobacter frateurii, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Burkholderia ubonensis, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Microbacterium foliorum and Euglena gracilis were evaluated for the first time. Sphingomonas elodea cannot be assessed for a possible QPS recommendation because it is not a valid species. Corynebacterium ammoniagenes and Euglena gracilis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification 'for production purposes only'. The following TUs cannot be recommended for the QPS list: Burkholderia ubonensis, due to its potential and confirmed ability to generate biologically active compounds and limited of body of knowledge; Corynebacterium casei, Gluconobacter frateurii and Microbacterium foliorum, due to lack of body of knowledge; Phaeodactylum tricornutum , based on the lack of a safe history of use in the food chain and limited knowledge on its potential production of bioactive compounds with possible toxic effects., (© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

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, S almonella  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 CrI 95 [98,540; 602,700] compared to the situation in 2016. This translates to a reduction of 53.4% CrI 95 [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., (© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

Parasites are important food-borne pathogens. Their complex lifecycles, varied transmission routes, and prolonged periods between infection and symptoms mean that the public health burden and relative importance of different transmission routes are often difficult to assess. Furthermore, there are challenges in detection and diagnostics, and variations in reporting. A Europe-focused ranking exercise, using multicriteria decision analysis, identified potentially food-borne parasites of importance, and that are currently not routinely controlled in food. These are Cryptosporidium spp., Toxoplasma gondii and Echinococcus spp. Infection with these parasites in humans and animals, or their occurrence in food, is not notifiable in all Member States. This Opinion reviews current methods for detection, identification and tracing of these parasites in relevant foods, reviews literature on food-borne pathways, examines information on their occurrence and persistence in foods, and investigates possible control measures along the food chain. The differences between these three parasites are substantial, but for all there is a paucity of well-established, standardised, validated methods that can be applied across the range of relevant foods. Furthermore, the prolonged period between infection and clinical symptoms (from several days for Cryptosporidium to years for Echinococcus spp.) means that source attribution studies are very difficult. Nevertheless, our knowledge of the domestic animal lifecycle (involving dogs and livestock) for Echinoccocus granulosus means that this parasite is controllable. For Echinococcus multilocularis , for which the lifecycle involves wildlife (foxes and rodents), control would be expensive and complicated, but could be achieved in targeted areas with sufficient commitment and resources. Quantitative risk assessments have been described for Toxoplasma in meat. However, for T. gondii  and  Cryptosporidium  as faecal contaminants, development of validated detection methods, including survival/infectivity assays and consensus molecular typing protocols, are required for the development of quantitative risk assessments and efficient control measures., (© 2018 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)

In 2017, EFSA published a 'simplified' food safety management system (FSMS) for certain small retail establishments (butcher, grocer, baker, fish and ice cream shop) based on the application of prerequisite programme (PRP) criteria. The aim of this opinion was to develop similar FSMSs for other small retail enterprises including retail distribution centres, supermarkets, restaurants (including pubs and other catering activities) and food donation. The latter presents several novel food safety challenges because donated food may be nearing the end of its shelf-life and several actors are involved in the food donation chain, each reliant on each other to assure food safety. In this opinion, the simplified approach to food safety management is presented based on a fundamental understanding of processing stages and the activities contributing to increased occurrence of the hazards (biological, chemical (including allergens) or physical) that may occur. Control is achieved using PRP activities as previously described but with a modified 'temperature control' PRP and the addition of PRPs covering shelf-life control, handling returned foods, shelf-life evaluation for food donation, allocation of remaining shelf-life, and freezing food intended for donation. Examples of the simplified approach are presented for retail distribution centres, supermarkets, restaurants and food donation., (© 2018 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.)