Search

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an endo-1,4-β-xylanase (Beltherm MP/ML), produced by a genetically-modified Bacillus subtilis strain, as a zootechnical additive for laying hens, minor poultry species and all avian species. The additive is authorised for use in feed for poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding, weaned piglets, pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for fattening. The safety and efficacy of the additive for those species have been evaluated previously by the EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel). The current application is for an extension of use of the additive. No viable cells were detected in the additive, but the data provided to support the absence of DNA in the additive was not sufficient to conclude on the absence of recombinant DNA in the additive. However, the Panelconcluded that no safety concerns would arise from the presence of DNA from the production strain in the additive. In the current assessment, the FEEDAP Panelconcluded that the additive is safe for all avian species at the recommended level of 100 ADXU/kg feed. Similarly, the FEEDAP Panelconcluded that Beltherm MP/ML is safe for the consumer and the environment. Concerning the user safety, the FEEDAP Panelconcluded that the additive is not toxic by inhalation or irritant for skin or eyes, but it is considered a potential dermal and a respiratory sensitiser. In a previous opinion, the efficacy of the additive in poultry species for fattening was shown. However, owing to the insufficient data submitted in previous and current assessments, the Panelcould not conclude on the efficacy of the product for the target species for which the application was made.

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 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. 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 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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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. 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

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. 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 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. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

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, the EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of 31 compounds belonging to different chemical groups, when used as sensory additives in feed for all animal species. Twenty-two out of the 31 compounds were tested in tolerance studies in chickens for fattening, piglets and cattle for fattening. For the remaining nine compounds, read across from structurally similar compounds was proposed. No adverse effects were observed in the tolerance studies at 10-fold the intended level. The FEEDAP Panelconcluded that the 22 compounds are safe for these species at the proposed use level and conclusions were extrapolated to all animal species for all the compounds except for α-damascone [07.134]. In the absence of data that would allow the FEEDAP Panelto rule out the genotoxicity concern, the FEEDAP Panelcannot extend the conclusions for α-damascone [07.134] to all animal species and cannot conclude on the safety for the consumer, the user and the environment. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of the remaining 30 compounds up to the highest levels considered safe for target animals. The revised maximum safe levels for the 30 compounds are not expected to further impact on the previous conclusions on user safety. The concentrations considered safe for the target species are unlikely to have detrimental effects on the environment for all the compounds except β-damascone [07.083] and (E)-β-damascone [07.224], for which in the absence of ecotoxicity data, the FEEDAP Panelcannot conclude on the safety for the terrestrial compartments. For the marine environment, the safe use level for 2-methyl-1-phenylpropan-2-ol [02.035], α-irone [07.011], β-damascone [07.083] and (E)-β-damascone [07.224], phenethyl isovalerate [09.466], 4-(p-hydroxyphenyl) butan-2-one [07.055] and 2-isopropyl-4-methylthiazole [15.026] is confirmed to be 0.05 mg/kg.

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 of 3-phytase FLF1000/FSF10000 as a feed additive for pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for growing. This additive contains 3-phytase produced by a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii and it is authorised in its liquid FLF1000 and solid form FSF10000 as a feed additive for chickens for fattening, laying hens, chickens reared for laying and for minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying or for breeding. The FEEDAP Panelhas adopted an opinion regarding the use of this product as a feed additive in pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for growing. In that opinion, the FEEDAP Panelconcluded that the use of the product as a feed additive would raise no concerns for the consumer safety nor for the environment but that the additive should be regarded as a potential respiratory sensitizer. The Panelalso concluded that the additive has a potential to be efficacious in improving the phosphorus utilisation in the target species. However, the Panelcould not conclude on the safety for the target species due to the limitations identified in the data provided. The applicant has now complemented the information and made it available to the Panel. The tolerance trial was done in weaned piglets in which the animals received up to 10 times the recommended dose of 1,000 FTU/kg feed. The results showed no adverse effects of the phytase on the performance of the animals or on the haematological and biochemical parameters measured in blood. Therefore, the Panelconcluded that the additive (3-phytase FLF1000 and FSF10000) is safe for pigs for fattening and minor growing porcine species at the recommended dose of 1,000 FTU/kg feed.

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Taminizer D (dimethylglycine sodium salt) as a feed additive for chickens for fattening, based on a dossier submitted for the modification of the terms of authorisation of the additive. The product is authorised in the European Union for chickens for fattening at the maximum content of 1,000mg/kg complete feedingstuffs. The applicant proposed the introduction of an additional manufacturing process, which introduces an impurity (dimethylamino-ethanol (DMAE)) in the additive at concentrations up to 0.09%. The EFSA Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considered that the proposed modification would not substantially affect the previous assessment as related to the safety of the environment and the efficacy of the product. Since the safety of the active substance was established, the current assessment has dealt with the impurity DMAE. Considering the toxicological profile of DMAE, the estimated intake by the target animal and consumers, and making use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) approach, the Panelconcluded that Taminizer D, manufactured by the DMAE route, is safe for both chickens for fattening and consumers, up to the maximum level of 1,000 mg/kg feed. The FEEDAP Panelextends its conclusions about Taminizer D produced by the original method to cover also Taminizer D produced by the new DMAE method. There is minimal risk to users from dust produced as a result of normal handling of the additive. Taminizer D is not irritant to skin but may be irritant to eyes; it is regarded as a potential skin sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panelrecommended to set a specification for the DMAE content in the additive.

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the product TYFER™ (ferric tyrosine chelate) as zootechnical feed additive for chickens, turkeys and minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. The additive is safe for chickens for fattening at the maximum expected level of 200 mg TYFER™/kg complete feed; this conclusion can be extended to chickens reared for laying/breeding and extrapolated to turkeys and all minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. No concerns for consumer safety are expected from the use of the additive in poultry nutrition. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considers that the additive poses a risk to users by inhalation, and should also be considered as an irritant to skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Due to the presence of nickel, ferric tyrosine chelate should also be considered as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. The supplementation of feed with the additive is not expected to pose an environmental risk. TYFER™ used at the minimum recommended level (20 mg/kg feed) in chickens diets has the potential to improve zootechnical parameters of birds. The additive at 20 mg/kg feed has the potential to reduce the caecal load Campylobacter spp. by at least 1 log10‐units in chickens for fattening, thus with a potential impact to reduce the risk of human campylobacteriosis; however, the Panel notes that the load of Campylobacter in the chickens caecum is one of the multiple factors that contribute to Campylobacter load in carcases‐meat. The conclusions on the efficacy of the additive can be extended to chickens reared for laying/breeding and extrapolated to turkeys and all minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. The Panel recommends including a specification for maximum lithium content in a potential authorisation of the additive.

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.

© 2020 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 Nimicoat® (carvacrol), as a zootechnical additive for weaned piglets. The additive is composed by carvacrol (≥ 40 %) as an active substance encapsulated with high-melting lipids. Nimicoat® is intended to be used in feed for weaned piglets at a minimum recommended dose of 250 mg/kg complete feed and at a maximum recommended dose of 1,000 mg/kg complete feed corresponding to a minimum and maximum of 100 and 400 mg carvacrol/kg complete feed, respectively. Based on a tolerance study, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of Nimicoat® in feed for weaned piglet at the maximum recommended dose of 1,000 mg/kg feed is safe for the target animal; however, a precise figure for the margin of safety cannot be defined. Nimicoat® used in feed for weaned piglets at the maximum recommended concentration does not pose a safety concern for consumers. The additive is corrosive to eyes, skin and the respiratory mucosae. Concerning safety for the environment a Phase II was required; taking into consideration the data provided, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive does not pose any risk to the terrestrial and aquatic compartments and that bioaccumulation potential for carvacrol is low and risk for secondary poisoning for worm/fish eating birds and mammals is not likely to occur. Only one study positively supporting efficacy of the additive was available therefore, the FEEDAP Panel is not in a position to conclude on the efficacy of Nimicoat®.

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

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.

The Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked by the European Commission to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of benzoic acid as feed flavouring for piglets (suckling, weaned), pigs for fattening, sows (for reproduction, in order to have benefit in piglets), minor porcine species, chickens (for fattening, reared for laying), hens (laying, breeding), turkeys (for fattening, for breeding purposes, reared for breeding) and minor poultry species. Benzoic acid is safe for weaned piglets at 2,500mg/kg feed, and for laying hens, turkeys and chickens for fattening at 500mg/kg feed; no conclusions could be drawn for suckling piglets and sows. The conclusions on weaned piglets can be extended to pigs for fattening and extrapolated to growing minor porcine species. The conclusions on chickens/turkeys for fattening can be extended to chickens reared for laying and turkeys reared for breeding and extrapolated to minor poultry species up to the point of lay. In the absence of safety margin in laying hens, no conclusions can be reached for minor poultry species for laying/breeding. The use of the additive is not expected to pose a risk to consumer, considering that the additive is rapidly metabolised with very low deposition, if any, in edible tissues of pigs and poultry and that foods of animal origin provide a very minor contribution, if any, to the overall dietary intake of benzoic acid. Owing to the unlikelihood of exposure, no risk to users upon inhalation of the additive is expected; the additive is not a skin sensitiser, but is a skin/ eye irritant. The proposed use of the additive does not pose environmental risks. Benzoic acid is authorised as food flavouring and its function in feed is essentially the same; no further demonstration of efficacy is necessary.

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.