Search

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

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

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

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of ROVABIO® ADVANCE (liquid and solid) which contains endo-1,4-beta-xylanase and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase. The enzymes present in the additive are produced by two strains of Talaromyces versatilis, one of them genetically modified. The additive is intended to be used as a feed additive for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening. Viable cells of the production strains and DNA of the genetically modified strain were not detected in the fermentation product used to formulate the additive. Based on the results of a tolerance trial in weaned piglets, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that ROVABIO® ADVANCE is safe for weaned piglets under the recommended conditions of use. This conclusion was extended to pigs for fattening. Based on the outcome of the toxicological studies performed, the Panel concluded that the additive is of no concern regarding consumer safety. ROVABIO® ADVANCE is not irritant to the skin or eyes but it is a skin and respiratory sensitiser. No risks to the environment are expected from the use of the additive in animal nutrition. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of ROVABIO® ADVANCE.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Bifidobacterium longum CNCM I-5642 (PP102I) when used as a feed additive for cats and dogs. The product under assessment consists of viable cells of a strain of B. longum, a species considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The strain was unambiguously identified as B. longum and was shown not to harbour antimicrobial resistance determinants for antibiotics of human and veterinary importance, thus meeting the QPS requirements. Following the QPS approach to safety assessment and since no concerns are expected from maltodextrin, the other component of the additive, PP102I was considered safe for the target species and the environment. Owing to the lack of data, no conclusions could be drawn on the skin/eye irritancy potential of PP102I. However, it should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The Panelwas not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of PP102I for the target species.

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 HOSTAZYM® X as a feed additive for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. This additive consists of endo-1,4-β-xylanase produced by a non-genetically modified strain of Trichoderma citroviride. The additive is to be used in sows at 1,500 EPU/kg feed. In a previous opinion, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive when added to feed for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. The applicant provided new efficacy data to complete the assessment of the efficacy of the additive. Based on the previously assessed data and the newly submitted one, the Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive.

Following a request from the European Commission, the FEEDAP Panel was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of l-methionine ≥ 98.5% or ≥ 90% produced by the combined activities of Corynebacterium glutamicum KCCM 80245 and Escherichia coli KCCM 80246) as nutritional additive for all animal species. The two production strains are genetically modified. l-Methionine is intended to be used in feed or water for drinking for all animal species. Neither viable cells nor recombinant DNA of the production strains were detected in the final products. The additive does not pose any safety concern associated with the genetic modification of the production strains. The use of both products of l-methionine produced by C. glutamicum KCCM 80245 and E. coli KCCM 80246 in supplementing feed to compensate for l-methionine deficiency in feedingstuffs is safe for the target species. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns about the use of amino acids in water for drinking for hygienic reasons, and due to the risk of imbalances when administered simultaneously via feed. The use of both products of l-methionine produced by C. glutamicum KCCM 80245 and E. coli KCCM 80246 in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers and for the environment. The additive, in either product, is not an irritant to skin/eyes and not a dermal sensitiser and shows no toxicity by inhalation. Considering the respiratory exposure to endotoxins, l-methionine ≥ 90% is a risk for the user. Both products of the additive produced by C. glutamicum KCCM 80245 and E. coli KCCM 80246 are considered as an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-methionine for non-ruminant animal species. For the supplemental l-methionine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it would require protection against degradation in the rumen.

Amaferm® is a fermentation product produced by Aspergillus oryzae NRRL 458, containing alpha-amylase and cellulase enzyme activities, authorised for use as a feed additive for dairy cows. In 2016, the applicant requested for the renewal of the authorisation and the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) issued an opinion at that regard in 2020. In that opinion, the Panel could not confirm the previously drawn conclusions (EFSA, 2006) regarding the safety of the production strain, and consequently could not confirm the safety of the additive for the target species and consumers. In the current submission, the applicant provided supplementary information that allowed the Panel to conclude on the identity of the production strain, redefine the specifications of the additive, and finally to conclude on its safety. Therefore, the new data provided permit to conclude that Amaferm® complies with the conditions of the authorisation. However, the Panel noted that there is the need to change the specification and description of the cellulase and amylase units in the authorisation act. The data provided in the previous (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2020) and the current assessments support that Amaferm® remains safe under the approved conditions for target species, consumers and the environment. The additive is non-irritant to skin and eyes, or a dermal sensitiser but should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser.

Following a request from the European Commission, the FEEDAP Panel was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of astaxanthin (ATX)-rich Phaffia rhodozyma. The additive, belonging to the category ‘sensory additives’ and the functional group ‘substances which, when fed to animals, add colours to food of animal origin’ is intended to be used in feed for salmon and trout from an age of six months onwards up to a maximum content of 100 mg ATX/kg complete feed. The product is produced by the telemorph of Phaffia rhodozyma, Xanthophyllomyces dendrorhous, and it is declared to contain 995 g dried inactivated biomass and 5 g ascorbic acid per kg additive. The main active principle of the additive is ATX; however, the FEEDAP Panel noted that some other carotenoids are also present in lower quantities. The minimum ATX concentration is specified to be 5,000 mg per kg additive. The yeast Xanthophyllomyces dendrorhous is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment; therefore, the use of the production strain in the production of the additive would not raise any safety concern for the target species, the consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment. In the absence of a tolerance study with the additive, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the target species. In the absence of residue and toxicity data of ATX, no final conclusions on the safety for the consumer can be drawn. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is irritant to skin and eyes, and a skin and respiratory sensitiser, although exposure by inhalation is likely low. The FEEDAP Panel considers that ATX from the biomass does not pose a significant additional risk to the environment compared with other natural sources of ATX. In absence of adequate evidence, no conclusion can be made on the efficacy of the additive.

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 Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 12856 as a technological additive for use in forage for all animal species. The additive aims at improving the production of silage and is authorised 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 concludes that the additive remains safe for all animal species, consumers and the environment under the authorised conditions of use. Regarding user safety L. buchneri DSM 12856 is not irritant to skin and eyes but is considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of BA-KING® Bacillus velezensis when used as a feed additive for chickens for fattening, turkeys for fattening, chickens reared for laying, turkeys reared for breeding and all avian species for fattening, or rearing to slaughter or point of lay including non-food producing species. The product under assessment is based on viable spores of a strain identified as B. velezensis, which is considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The identity of the active agent was established, and it does not harbour acquired antimicrobial resistance genes, lacks toxigenic potential and does not have the capacity to produce aminoglycosides. Following the QPS approach to safety assessment, B. velezensis NITE BP-01844 is presumed safe for the target species, consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and the environment. Since no concerns are expected from the other components of the additive, BA-KING® is also considered safe for the target species, consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and the environment. BA-KING® is not irritant to skin but is potentially irritant to eyes. In addition, should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The Panel is not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of BA-KING® for the target species.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an additive consisting of Propionibacterium freudenreichii DSM 33189 and Lentilactobacillus buchneri (formerly Lactobacillus buchneri) DSM 12856 as a technological additive for all animal species. The additive is intended to improve the production of silage at a proposed application rate of 1 × 108 colony-forming units (CFU)/kg fresh material. The bacterial species P. freudenreichii and L. buchneri are considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to assessment. As the identity of the strains has been clearly established and no acquired antimicrobial resistance determinants of concern were detected, the use of the strains as a silage additive is considered safe for livestock species, for consumers and for the environment. The additive is not irritant for eyes or skin but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the potential of the additive to be a skin sensitiser. The additive at the proposed application rate of 1 × 108 CFU/kg fresh plant material showed the potential to improve the aerobic stability silage with dry matter content ranging from 30% to 70%.

Σκοπός της παρούσας έρευνας ήταν η διερεύνηση της παρουσίας παρασίτων σε δείγματα κοπράνων βουβάλων, της φυλής του Ελληνικού βουβάλου (Bubalus bubalis), που εκτρέφονται σε περιοχές της Περιφερειακής Ενότητας Σερρών στη Βόρεια Ελλάδα. Κατά το χρονικό διάστημα Φεβρουάριος – Οκτώβριος 2014, εξετάσθηκαν δείγματα κοπράνων από 110 βουβάλους της φυλής του Ελληνικού βουβάλου (Bubalus bubalis), από 9 εκτροφές που βρίσκονται σε αγροτικούς οικισμούς περιμετρικά της λίμνης Κερκίνης, με σκοπό την ανεύρεση αναπαραγωγικών στοιχείων παρασίτων (αυγών, προνυμφών, κύστεων και ωοκύστεων). Κατά την εξέταση των 110 δειγμάτων κοπράνων, τα 102 (92,73%) βρέθηκαν μολυσμένα με αναπαραγωγικά στοιχεία παρασίτων. Συγκεκριμένα, τα παράσιτα που βρέθηκαν ήταν: Eimeria spp. (40%), Entamoeba bovis (16,36%), Paramphistomum cervi (10%), Fasciola hepatica (16,36%), Dicrocoelium dendriticum (28,18%), Moniezia benedeni (27,27%), Toxocara vitulorum (11,82%), Στρογγυλοειδή (γαστρεντερικά νηματώδη) (31,82%) και πνευμονικά παράσιτα (28,18%). Στην παρούσα έρευνα γίνεται η πρώτη αναφορά της ανεύρεσης πνευμονικών παρασίτων στους βουβάλους, στην Ελλάδα., This study was conducted in order to determine the presence of parasitic infections of the Greek buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) in the Prefecture of Serres, Northern Greece. During the period from February to October 2014, faecal samples from 110 buffaloes of the Greek buffalo breed (Bubalus bubalis), from 9 farms located in proximity to Lake Kerkini, in the Prefecture of Serres, Northern Greece, were examined, in order to find reproductive elements of parasites. Out of 110 faecal samples examined, 102 (92.73%) were found infected with reproductive elements (eggs, larvae, cysts and oocysts) of parasites. Specifically, the parasites found were: Eimeria spp. (40%), Entamoeba bovis (16.36%), Paramphistomum cervi (10%), Fasciola hepatica (16.36%), Dicrocoelium dendriticum (28.18%), Moniezia benedeni (27.27%), Toxocara vitulorum (11.82%), Strongylida (gastrointestinal nematodes) (31.82%) and lungworms (28.18%). The present study appears to be the first report of the detection of lungworms in buffaloes, in Greece.

L-Methionine, feed grade, is a feed additive produced by two genetically modified Escherichia coli strains. Neither the production strains nor their recombinant DNA were detected in the final product; thus, no safety concerns are associated with the genetic modification of the production strains. The L-methionine produced by such E. coli strains is safe for the target animals when used as a feed additive to meet their requirements. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns over the safety of L-methionine for the target species when administered via water for drinking since any additional supply of an essential amino acid would disturb the balanced amino acid profile of complete diets. There are no safety concerns for the consumer associated with the use of L-methionine in animal nutrition. The additive L-methionine was demonstrated to be without irritant or dermal sensitising properties. Although no data on dusting potential were provided, the FEEDAP Panel considers it unlikely that the user will be exposed to significant amounts of L-methionine by inhalation. L-Methionine is a natural constituent of plants and animals. Its use in animal nutrition does not represent a risk to the environment. The additive L-methionine is considered an efficacious source of the amino acid L-methionine for all animal species.

L-Valine is a feed additive produced by a genetically modified strain of Corynebacterium glutamicum. Neither the production strain nor its recombinant DNA was found in the final product. The final product does not raise any safety concern with regard to the genetic modifications. L-Valine is safe for all target animals when added in appropriate amounts to diets. However, the FEEDAP Panel has concerns over the safety of L-valine for target species when administered via water for drinking since any additional supply of an essential amino acid would disturb the balanced amino acid pattern of complete diets. When used in animal nutrition, L-valine will be incorporated into the protein of the body of the target animal, and any potential excess will be metabolised and excreted. Considering the high purity of the product under assessment, and the lack of toxicological effects at likely use levels, no risks are expected for the consumer from the use L-valine as a feed additive. The L-valine produced by such strain of C. glutamicum has been shown not to be an irritant or a dermal sensitiser. The results of an acute inhalation study performed at high concentration show no evidence of significant acute toxicity by this route. Exposure of users by inhalation cannot be excluded. L-Valine is a natural constituent of plants and animals. Its use in animal nutrition does not represent a risk to the environment. L-Valine is efficacious as a supplemented amino acid to maintain or restore the adequate balance of amino acids for animal nutrition. A response in ruminants requires some degree of protection of L-valine from ruminal degradation.

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

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of disodium 5’-guanylate produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium stationis KCCM 10530 and Escherichia coli K-12 KFCC 11067 when used as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The additive does not raise safety concerns under the proposed conditions of use for the target species, consumers the users and the environment. The Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) expressed reservations on the use of the additive in water for drinking due to concerns on its impact on hygienic conditions of the water. The Panelconcluded that the additive is efficacious to contribute to the flavour of feed.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Belfeed B MP/ML as a feed additive for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. The additive is to be used in to sows in order to have benefits in piglets and to all porcine species at any developmental stage at 10 IU/kg feed. This additive consists of endo-1,4-β-xylanase produced by a genetically modified strain of Bacillus subtilis (LMG S-15136). In a previous opinion, the FEEDAP Panelcould not conclude on the safety of the additive for the users regarding the potential of the additive as dermal sensitiser and on the efficacy of the additive when added to feed for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. In the absence of new information, the FEEDAP Panelretained its previous conclusion that the additive is not irritant to skin or eyes but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. No conclusions could be drawn on its potential to be a dermal sensitiser. The applicant provided new efficacy data and complementary information regarding a previous study. Based on the previously assessed data and the newly submitted ones, the Panelconcludes that although the additive has a potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in sows during the lactation period at the level of 10 IU/kg feed, the data are considered not sufficient to conclude on a beneficial effect on the performance of the litters.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of muramidase produced by Trichoderma reesei DSM 32338 (Balancius™) as a feed additive for weaned piglets. The additive has been previously assessed by the FEEDAP Panelin the context of other applications, and in the current assessment the applicant requests for an extension of use. Based on the data available in a sub-chronic oral toxicity study, the Panelconcluded that the additive is safe for weaned piglets at the maximum recommended level of 65,000 LSU(F)/kg feed. The additive is safe for the consumers and the environment but should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser. The Panelcould not conclude on the potential of the additive for skin/eye irritancy and skin sensitisation. The additive has the potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive for weaned piglets at the dose of 50,000 LSU(F)/kg feed.

The additive Biosprint® contains viable cells of Saccharomyces cerevisiae MUCL 39885 and is authorised as a feed additive in sows, dairy cows, horses, piglets (weaned), cattle for fattening, minor ruminants for fattening and minor ruminants for dairy products. The applicant has requested to extend the use of the additive to cats and dogs at a minimum inclusion level of 7 × 1010 CFU/kg of complete feed. S. cerevisiae is considered by EFSA to have qualified presumption of safety status and consequently is considered safe for the target species. The additive is considered as a potential skin and eye irritant and a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Based on the results on efficacy studies provided, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that Biosprint® is efficacious when used in feeds for dogs. However, the FEEDAP Panel considered that the biological relevance of the magnitude of the effect detected is questionable. Based on the trial available, the FEEDAP Panel was unable to conclude on the efficacy of the additive when administered to cats.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the feed additive consisting of four bacteriophages infecting Salmonella Gallinarum B/00111 (PCM F/00069, PCM F/00070, PCM F/00071 and PCM F/00097, trade name: Bafasal®) when used as a zootechnical additive in water for drinking and liquid complementary feed for all avian species. The effects sought are the reduction of the Salmonella spp. carriage in chickens for fattening, the improvement of their performance, or both. The host strain harbours an acquired antimicrobial resistance gene. No viable cells or DNA from the host organism were found in the additive. The four phages proved to be strictly lytic and to have a machinery allowing to package a unit-length of the viral genome. The manufacturing process excludes the presence of remnants from the propagation process in the final additive. Consequently, no concerns are expected from the nature and manufacture of the product. Considering this and the results of the tolerance study with chickens for fattening, the Panelconcluded that Bafasal® is safe for all avian species. Considering the nature and manufacturing process of the additive, Bafasal® is not expected to pose a risk for consumers. The results of the subchronic oral toxicity study and genotoxicity studies provided support this conclusion. Exposure of users via inhalation is expected to be low, but Bafasal® should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. No conclusions were drawn on the irritancy of Bafasal® to skin and eyes or on its dermal sensitisation potential due to lack of data. Considering the nature and manufacturing process of the additive, Bafasal® is safe for the environment. The Panelwas not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of Bafasal® for any avian species due to insufficient data.

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Bonvital® for laying hens. Bonvital® is an additive containing viable cells of Enterococcus faeciumDSM 7134 marketed in two forms, a granular and a powder form, both with a guaranteed minimum concentration of E. faeciumDSM 7134 of 1.0×1010 colony forming units (CFU)/g additive. Bonvital® in either form is intended for use in feed for laying hens at the minimum concentration of 1.0×109 CFU/kg complete feed and at the maximum concentration of 1.0×1010 CFU/kg feedingstuffs. Bonvital powder® is also proposed for use in water for drinking at the minimum concentration of 5.0×108 CFU/L. The use of Bonvital® in animal nutrition is considered safe for the target animals. The results of a tolerance trial in which hens were fed the additive at 10-fold the maximum recommended dose support this conclusion. Delivery of comparable doses of the additive via water for drinking is considered as safe for laying hens. Bonvital® at the proposed conditions of use is safe for consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and for the environment. Bonvital® is not a dermal or ocular irritant but a potential dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Bonvital® has the potential to be efficacious in improving the hen's performance when supplemented at 1.0×109 CFU/kg feed or 5.0×108 CFU/L water for drinking.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of TechnoSpore® (Bacillus coagulans DSM 32016), when used as a zootechnical additive for piglets (suckling and weaned), other growing Suidae, chickens for fattening, other poultry for fattening and ornamental birds. The bacterial species present in the additive is considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. The identity of the active agent was established and the lack of toxigenic potential confirmed. B. coagulans DSM 32016 did not show resistance to antibiotics of human and veterinary importance, and therefore, was presumed safe for the target species, consumers of products derived from animals Fed the additive and the environment. Since the other components of the additive did not give rise to concerns, TechnoSpore® was also considered safe for the target species, consumer and the environment. The additive is not a skin/eye irritant or a skin sensitiser but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. TechnoSpore® showed the potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in weaned piglets and chickens for fattening at 1×109 CFU/kg complete feed. This conclusion was extended to suckling piglets and extrapolated to other growing Suidae at the same physiological stage and to other birds for fattening and ornamental birds at the same use level. B. coagulans DSM 32016 included in Technospore® is compatible with halofuginone and diclazuril. The Panelcould not conclude on the compatibility of the additive with monensin sodium, decoquinate, robenidine hydrochloride, lasalocid sodium, narasin, salinomycin sodium, maduramicin ammonium, nicarbazin and narasin/nicarbazin.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy ofAxtra® XAP 104 TPT as a zootechnical feed additive (digestibility enhancers) for poultry species. The additive contains three enzyme activities (endo-1,4-beta-xylanase, protease and alpha-amylase) produced by three different genetically modified strains. Viable cells and recombinant DNA of the strains producing the protease and amylase were not detected in the final product. Owing to the insufficient data, uncertainty remained on the presence in the additive of viable cells of the strain producing the xylanase. The results obtained in the genotoxicity and subchronic oral toxicity studies performed with the three fermentation products did not indicate safety concerns resulting from the fermentation products used in the formulation/manufacturing. However, uncertainties remain on the suitability of the test item used in the studies conducted with the xylanase; therefore, the Panelwas not in the position to conclude on the toxicological potential of AXTRA® XAP 104 TPT. Consequently, the Panelcould not conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species, consumers and users. Owing to the uncertainty on the presence of viable cells of one of the production strains in the additive, the Panelcould not conclude on the safety for the environment. The FEEDAP Panelconcluded that AXTRA® XAP 104 TPT 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 U xylanase, 200 U amylase and 4,000 U protease per kg feed. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the Panelcould not conclude on the efficacy of the additive for laying hens.

© 2020 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of STABILFLOR® (zinc ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (Zn-EDTA) and copper diammonium EDTA (Cu-EDTA) dried on chicory pulp and supplemented with zinc oxide and copper oxide), as a zootechnical additive for pigs. STABILFLOR® is intended to be used in feed for pigs for fattening at a minimum and maximum levels of 500 and 1,000 mg/kg complete feed, respectively. The Panel could not conclude on the safety of STABILFLOR® for pigs for fattening owing to the lack of adequate data. At the proposed used levels in feed the additive may exert antimicrobial activity in the gut microbiota. The use of the additive resulted neither in residues of Zn-EDTA, Cu-EDTA or EDTA nor on an increase in total zinc and copper deposition in edible tissues; Zn-EDTA and Cu-EDTA had not a genotoxic potential; the Panel concluded that STABILFLOR® at 1,000 mg/kg complete feed for pigs does not pose any concern to the safety of consumers. The handling of STABILFLOR® will lead to a copper exposure of the users that poses a risk by inhalation; the additive is not a skin irritant or a skin sensitiser but is a severe eye irritant. Regarding environmental safety, no concern was expected for the terrestrial compartment. A risk for groundwater was highlighted for Zn-EDTA. Due to the absence of data, the risk for the aquatic compartment could not be assessed. Only one efficacy study showed positive effects of STABILFLOR® in pigs for fattening at 1,000 mg/kg complete feed; a conclusion on the efficacy of STABILFLOR® could not be drawn. The minimum use level of 500 mg STABILFLOR®/kg complete feed was not tested.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panelon Additives and products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of OptiPhos® PLUS (6-phytase) as a zootechnical feed additive for suckling and weaned piglets, pigs for fattening, sows, other minor pig species for fattening and other minor reproductive pig species. The additive is a preparation of 6-phytase produced by a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii and has been previously assessed by the FEEDAP Panelin the context of two applications for its use in different species/categories. The Panelconcluded in those opinions that the production strain is safe, and that the use of the additive as a feed additive would raise no safety concerns for the consumers and the environment. The additive was also considered not to be skin irritant but was found to be a dermal sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panelcould not conclude on the eye irritation potential of the additive. Owing to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. Based on the tolerance studies provided, the Panelconcluded that the additive is safe for the target species under the conditions of use with a wide margin of safety and therefore the conclusion were extended to suckling piglets and extrapolated to other minor pig species for fattening and to other minor reproductive pig species. The FEEDAP Panelconcluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious in weaned piglets, pigs for fattening and in sows at the level of 250 FTU/kg feed and this conclusion were extended to suckling piglets and extrapolated to other minor pig species for fattening and to other minor reproductive pig species.

© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. 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 additional data submitted on Lancer® when used as a feed additive for weaned piglets. The FEEDAP Panel considered that uncertainty still remains on possible developmental neurotoxicity of Lancer® since it was unable to identify a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) for this specific endpoint applying a read-across strategy from the studies provided by the applicant. However, the FEEDAP Panel considered that the exposure to La and Ce from products of animals treated with Lancer® at 250 mg/kg feed would not add a significant contribution to the background exposure of these elements. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of Lancer® in feed for weaned piglets (up to 120 days) according to the proposed conditions of use, does not represent a safety concern for the consumer and for the environment.

The additive (trade name Biomin®DC-P) is a blend of five individual compounds (carvacrol, thymol, d-carvone, methyl salicylate and l-menthol) encapsulated with a hydrogenated vegetable oil. The additive is intended for use in feed for various poultry species at a minimum concentration of 65mg/kg complete feed and a recommended maximum level of 105mg/kg complete feed. The results of a tolerance study show that Biomin® DC-P is safe for chickens for fattening at the maximum recommended application rate of 105 mg/kg complete feed; this conclusion is extended to include chickens reared for laying and extrapolated to minor poultry species The active components of a previously evaluated additive (Biomin®DC-C) were shown to be not genotoxic; owing to the similarity on composition, this conclusion can be also applied to Biomin®DC-P. Notwithstanding the uncertainties identified in the residue study, after applying a worst-case scenario to calculate potential exposure of consumers to menthol and carvone, and since that the components of the additive are considered safe for their use as food and feed flavourings, the FEEDAP Panelconcludes that the use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for consumers. The FEEDAP Panelconsidered that exposure of users by inhalation is unlikely, but cannot conclude on the effects of Biomin®DC-P on skin and eyes. The use of Biomin®DC-P is not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Biomin®DC-P has a potential to increase the growth performance of chickens for fattening when incorporated into feed at a minimum application rate of 65mg/kg complete feed; the conclusion can be extended to chickens reared for laying and extrapolated to minor poultry species reared up to the point of lay.

The Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of VevoVitall® (benzoic acid) as a zootechnical feed additive for pigs for fattening. The additive is currently authorised for pigs for fattening with the effect of ‘urinary pH decrease’ at the minimum and maximum use of 5,000 and 10,000mg/kg complete feed, respectively. The current application intends to support the use of the additive with the specific effect of ‘improvement of performance parameters’ at the minimum dose of 3,000mg additive/kg complete feed, and keeping the same other conditions as for the use already authorised. The FEEDAP Panelassessed already the safety of the product when used in pigs for fattening in 2007 and 2017. The Panelconfirms its former assessments that VevoVitall® used as a feed additive in pigs for fattening at the maximum level of 10,000mg/kg is considered as safe for pigs for fattening, consumers of food derived from pigs fed the additive and the environment. VevoVitall® does not pose a risk by inhalation to users and is not a skin sensitiser but is a skin irritant and a severe eye irritant. Based on the results of three efficacy studies, the FEEDAP Panelconcluded that VevoVitall® has the potential to increase the performance in pigs for fattening at the level of 3,000mg/kg complete feed.

The additive (trade name Biomin ® DC-C) is a blend of essential oils from oregano (Origanumvulgare L.) and from caraway seed (Carumcarvi L.) and three individual compounds (carvacrol, methyl salicylate and l-menthol) encapsulated with a hydrogenated vegetable oil. The additive is intended for use in feed for weaned piglets at a minimum concentration of 75mg/kg complete feed and a recommended maximum level of 125mg/kg complete feed. A tolerance test in which piglets were exposed to feed containing up to an intended 1,250mg additive/kg complete feed showed that additive is safe for piglets at the maximum recommended level with at least a sixfold margin of safety. The active components of the additive are not genotoxic and from the available residue study, based on the detection of five marker compounds, no measurable exposure of the consumers is foreseen; consequently, the use of the additive is considered safe for consumers of animal products. The FEEDAP Panelconsidered that exposure to users by inhalation is unlikely; in the absence of data, the Panelcannot conclude on the effects of Biomin ® DC-C on skin and eyes. The use of the additive in animal production is not expected to pose a risk for the terrestrial or aquatic environments. Based on the results of three efficacy studies in which positive benefits were seen, the additive has a potential to improve the growth performance of weaned piglets at a minimum application rate of 75mg/kg complete feed.

Following a request from European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety for the environment of the proposed modification of the terms of the authorisation regarding the formulation of the additive Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160. The applicant has proposed to modify the manufacturing process by adding polyethylene glycol (PEG 4000) in the list of potential cryoprotectants that can be used in the freeze-drying step, up to a maximum concentration of 0.025 mg PEG 4000/kg silage. The use of PEG 4000 as an excipient in formulations with Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160 would not change the previous conclusions regarding the safety for the target animals, consumers and users. No safety concerns are expected for the environment when PEG 4000 is used as a cryoprotectant in the additive Lactococcus lactis NCIMB 30160 up to a maximum concentration of 0.025 mg PEG 4000/kg silage. (C) 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of a preparation of algae interspaced bentonite when used as aflatoxin B1 (AfB1) binder for all animal species; the additive is composed of bentonite feed grade and algae belonging to Ulva spp. The European Commission request follows an opinion of the FEEDAP Panel published in 2016; in that opinion, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive. The applicant has submitted additional information to allow the FEEDAP Panel to complete its assessment; these additional data, related to the efficacy of the additive, are the subject of this opinion. In the efficacy study provided, the use of the additive reduced the AfM1 in milk, although this effect seemed to be not consistent over time; this study presented some weaknesses and limitations (incomplete data analysis, reporting and lack of determination of the active substance of the additive in feed) which do not allow the FEEDAP Panel to draw any conclusion on the efficacy of the additive. Due to insufficient evidence, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the efficacy of the algae interspaced bentonite as a technological feed additive for all animal species.

Fumonisin esterase produced from a genetically modified strain of Komagataellaphaffi is intended to degrade fumonisin mycotoxins contaminants in feeds for pigs and poultry. The production strain and its recombinant genes are not present in the final product. The applicant selected 300U/kg feed to represent a likely upper limit. This concentration showed to be safe for piglets, chickens and turkeys for fattening and laying hens; the additive is thus safe for those categories. This conclusion is extended to all pigs, chickens reared for laying and turkeys reared for breeding and extrapolated to all other poultry species for growing and laying and to minor porcine species. No evidence of mutagenicity or genotoxicity was detected and no evidence of toxicity from a repeated-dose oral toxicity study; the residue assessment did not identify any concern. The use of the additive is, thus, considered safe for consumers. The additive is not toxic by inhalation and the respiratory exposure is likely to be low; however, a risk of sensitisation via the respiratory route cannot be excluded. The additive is non-irritant to skin and eyes and is not considered a dermal sensitiser. No risks for the environment are expected following the use of the additive in feeds under the proposed condition of use. The additive has the capacity to degrade fumonisin contaminants in feed of marketable quality when used at the minimum recommended dose of 10U/kg complete feed, as shown in studies with chickens for fattening, laying hens and weaned piglets. Since the mode of action of the additive can be reasonably assumed to be the same in animal species for which the application is made, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considers the additive efficacious for all poultry and all pigs.

l-Glutamic acid, N,N-diacetic acid, tetrasodium salt (GLDA-Na 4 ) (Kelforce ® ) is sought to be used as a zootechnical feed additive in chickens for fattening to improve the absorption of zinc from feed, reducing zinc emissions through manure and thus, affecting favourably the environment. The product has not been authorised in the European Union as a feed additive. Kelforce ® is intended to be marketed as a liquid and solid formulation, containing ≥47% and ≥30% of GLDA-Na 4 , respectively. Kelforce ® is safe for chickens for fattening at the maximum level of 1,000mg GLDA-Na 4 /kg complete feed. Based on the toxicological profile of GLDA-Na 4 and the consumer exposure to GLDA-Na 4 and to nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt (NTA-Na 3 ; an impurity of the additive), the use of Kelforce ® at the maximum proposed level in feed of chickens for fattening is of no concern for consumer safety. Due to its low inhalation toxicity, the exposure to GLDA-Na 4 is unlikely to pose a risk by inhalation. However, owing to the high-dusting potential of the solid formulation, a risk from such high level of dust, even if toxicologically inert, cannot be excluded. Kelforce ® is not a skin/eye irritant or skin sensitiser. No risks for the terrestrial compartment were identified at the maximum use level of the additive. Risks for the aquatic compartment cannot be excluded based on the secondary effect of the additive on green algae. In the absence of data, the Panelcannot conclude on the safety for the sediment compartment or the possible ground water contamination. The risk of bioaccumulation and secondary poisoning caused by the additive is considered very low. Owing to the inconsistent and conflicting results from the studies assessed, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) cannot conclude on the efficacy of the additive. The Panelmade a recommendation regarding the levels of formaldehyde and cyanide in the active substance.

Liderfeed® is intended to be used as a zootechnical additive (functional group: other zootechnical additives) in feed of chickens for fattening to increase the performance. The additive contains eugenol as an active ingredient with some excipients and has not been authorised in the EU for use in food or feed. In 2015, the EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) adopted an opinion on the safety and efficacy of Liderfeed® as a zootechnical additive for chickens for fattening. In that opinion, the Panelcould not conclude on the efficacy of the additive because only two out of the three efficacy studies considered showed a significant effect on the performance of chickens for fattening as a result of the supplementation with the additive. The Commission gave the applicant the possibility of submitting additional information to allow the FEEDAP Panelto complete its assessment. For this reason, additional data have been provided related to the efficacy of the additive for the target species and this new information is the subject of this opinion. The new efficacy study on chickens for fattening is the subject of this assessment; the results of this study indicate an improvement in performance parameters with the use of the additive at 100mg/kg complete feed. Considering the results of the current study, along with the two efficacy studies already assessed in the previous FEEDAP Panelopinion of 2015, the Panelconcludes that Liderfeed® at 100mg/kg complete feed has the potential to improve the growth of chickens for fattening.

© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the coccidiostat Monimax® (monensin sodium and nicarbazin) when used in feed for turkeys or chickens for fattening. In previous assessments (2017, 2018), the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of Monimax® for the environment due to concerns on monensin sodium and 4,4′-dinitrocarbanilide (DNC, one of the moieties of nicarbazin). The applicant provided additional information that has been assessed. The use of monensin sodium from Monimax® in complete feed for chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying and turkeys for fattening poses no risk for the aquatic compartment, the terrestrial compartment or for sediment. The bioaccumulation potential of monensin in the environment is low. No concerns would arise for the 4,6-dimethylpyrimidin-2-ol (HDP) moiety of nicarbazin excreted from chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying and turkeys fed Monimax®. The use of DNC moiety of nicarbazin from Monimax® in complete feed for chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying and turkeys for fattening poses no risk for the aquatic compartment, the terrestrial compartments or for sediment. The bioaccumulation potential of DNC in the environment is low and the risk for secondary poisoning is not likely to occur.

© 2019 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. Following the 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 proposed modification of the terms of the authorisation regarding the maximum inclusion level of Maxiban® G160. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of Maxiban® G160 at a dose level of 70 + 70 mg/kg feed for the target species. The use of Maxiban® G160 in diets for chickens for fattening at the maximum proposed dose complies with the maximum residue levels (MRLs) in force of narasin and 4,4’-dinitrocarbanilide (DNC) at 0-day withdrawal except for DNC in kidney which was slightly above the MRL. Compliance with DNC MRLs was seen in all tissues at 1-day withdrawal. Based on the available data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of Maxiban® G160 for the environment due to the risk identified for the terrestrial organisms due to DNC. Moreover, the high persistence and hydrophobicity of DNC indicate that there might be a risk for bioaccumulation but the risk for secondary poisoning was not identified. The potential of DNC to accumulate in soil over the years should be investigated by monitoring in a field study. The FEEDAP Panel would not be in the position to conclude on the efficacy of Maxiban® G160 in chickens for fattening based on the data provided for the dose of 40 + 40 mg narasin + nicarbazin/kg feed.