Search

Abstract Despite evidence inferring muscle and contractile mode‐specific effects of high‐fat diet (HFD), no study has yet considered the impact of HFD directly on eccentric muscle function. The present work uniquely examined the effect of 20‐week HFD on the isometric, concentric and eccentric muscle function of isolated mouse soleus (SOL) and extensor digitorum longus (EDL) muscles. CD‐1 female mice were randomly split into a control (n = 16) or HFD (n = 17) group and for 20 weeks consumed standard lab chow or HFD. Following this period, SOL and EDL muscles were isolated and assessments of maximal isometric force and concentric work loop (WL) power were performed. Each muscle was then subjected to either multiple concentric or eccentric WL activations. Post‐fatigue recovery, as an indicator of incurred damage, was measured via assessment of concentric WL power. In the EDL, absolute concentric power and concentric power normalised to muscle mass were reduced in the HFD group (P

Purpose: Ageing is associated with cognitive decline. This study investigated the individual and combined effects of resistance exercise (RE) and whey protein supplementation (PRO) on cognitive function in older men. Methods: In a pooled-groups analysis, 36 older men (age: 67 ± 4 years) were randomised to either RE (2 x/week; n = 18) or no exercise (NE; n = 18), and either PRO (2 × 25 g/d whey protein isolate; n = 18) or control (CON, 2 × 23.75 g maltodextrin/d; n = 18). A sub-analysis was also conducted between RE + CON (n = 9) and RE + PRO (n = 9). At baseline and 12 weeks, participants completed a battery of neuropsychological tests (CANTAB; Cambridge Cognition, UK) and neurobiological, inflammatory, salivary cortisol and insulin sensitivity biomarkers were quantified. Results: PRO improved executive function z-score (+0.31 ± 0.08) greater than CON (+0.06 ± 0.08, P = 0.03) and there was a trend towards improved global cognitive function (P = 0.053). RE and RE + PRO did not improve any cognitive function domains (p ≥ 0.07). RE decreased tumor necrosis factor-alpha (P = 0.02) and interleukin-6 (P = 0.048) concentrations compared to NE, but changes in biomarkers did not correlate with changes in cognitive domains. Muscle strength (r = 0.34, P = 0.045) and physical function (ρ = 0.35–0.51, P

Abstract Whilst compression garments (CG) may enhance recovery from exercise‐induced muscle damage (EIMD), many recovery strategies can attenuate adaptative responses. Therefore, the effects of CG on recovery from EIMD, and the rapid protective adaptations known as the repeated bout effect (RBE) were investigated. Thirty‐four non‐resistance‐trained males (18–45 years) randomly received class II medical‐grade CG or placebo for 72 h following eccentrically‐focused lower‐body exercise, in a double‐blind, randomised controlled trial. Indices of EIMD were assessed at baseline, 0, 24, 48 and 72 h post‐exercise, before exercise and testing were repeated after 14 days. Results were analysed using a three‐way (time × condition × bout) linear mixed‐effects model. Exercise impaired isometric and isokinetic strength, with soreness and thigh circumference elevated for 72 h (P 0.05), despite small to moderate effect sizes (ES, reported alongside 90% confidence intervals) for isokinetic strength (ES from 0.2 [−0.41, 0.82] to 0.65 [0.03, 1.28]). All variables recovered faster after the repeated bout (P

Age-related declines in the musculoskeletal system may place additional demands on the lumbar spine during everyday activities such as walking. This study aimed to investigate age-related differences in the functional demand (FD) of walking on the lumbar spine in older and younger adults. A motion analysis system with integrated force plates was used to acquire kinematic and kinetic data on 12 older (67.3 ± 6.0 years) and 12 younger (24.7 ± 3.1 years) healthy men during walking at a self-selected speed along a 10 m walkway. Isokinetic dynamometry was used to acquire the maximal joint moment capacity of the lumbar spine. The FD of the lumbar spine was calculated as the muscle moment during key phases of the gait cycle (GC) relative to the maximum moment capacity of the lumbar spine. The difference in FD between age groups was not significant (p = 0.07) and there were no significant differences between the young group (YG) and older group (OG) for any individual phase in the GC. Despite the lack of statistical significance, the results indicate that a practical difference may exist, as walking was approximately 20% more functionally demanding on the lumbar spine in the OG compared to the YG. Therefore, older adults may employ modified gait strategies to reduce mechanical load whilst walking to fall within the limits of their maximal force-producing capacity in the lumbar spine, which may have implications for injury risk.

Abstract The human LHCN‐M2 myoblast cell line has the potential to be used to investigate skeletal muscle development and metabolism. Experiments were performed to determine how different concentrations of human serum affect myogenic differentiation and mitochondrial function of LHCN‐M2 cells. LHCN‐M2 myoblasts were differentiated in serum‐free medium, 0.5% or 2% human serum for 5 and 10 days. Myotube formation was assessed by immunofluorescence staining of myosin heavy chain (MHC) and molecularly by mRNA expression of Myogenic differentiation 1 (MYOD1) and Myoregulatory factor 5 (MYF5). Following differentiation, mitochondrial function was assessed to establish the impact of serum concentration on mitochondrial function. Time in differentiation increased mRNA expression of MYOD1 (day 5, 6.58 ± 1.33‐fold; and day 10, 4.28 ± 1.71‐fold) (P = 0.012), while suppressing the expression of MYF5 (day 5, 0.21 ± 0.11‐fold; and day 10, 0.06 ± 0.03‐fold) (P = 0.001), regardless of the serum concentration. Higher serum concentrations increased MHC area (serum free, 11.92 ± 0.85%; 0.5%, 23.10 ± 5.82%; 2%, 43.94 ± 8.92%) (P = 0.001). Absolute basal respiration approached significance (P = 0.06) with significant differences in baseline oxygen consumption rate (P = 0.025) and proton leak (P = 0.006) when differentiated in 2% human serum, but these were not different between conditions when normalised to total protein. Our findings show that increasing concentrations of serum of LHCN‐M2 skeletal muscle cells into multinucleated myotubes, but this does not affect relative mitochondrial function.

ObjectivesThis study aims to investigate the influence of vitamin D supplementation on immune function of healthy older adults.Materials and methodsDesigned as a randomized controlled trial, 21 participants (55–85 years) completed the study during May–November 2018 in Coventry, England. The participants were randomized into vitamin D or the control group, stratified by age, gender and body mass index. The vitamin D group (n = 12) took vitamin D3 tablets of 1,000 IU/day for 12 weeks plus vitamin D education leaflet, while the control group (n = 9) were only provided with the leaflet. At baseline, 6 and 12 weeks, plasma 25(OH)D levels and immunological and metabolic parameters including phagocytic activity of granulocytes and monocytes, tumor necrosis factor, interleukin 6, lymphocyte subsets and fasting blood glucose and lipid were measured. Dietary vitamin D intake was analyzed at baseline and week 12. Data were presented as mean ± SD. Two-way repeated measures ANOVA and independent t-test were used to analyze the data.ResultsAt baseline, 42.9% of the participants were vitamin D deficiency (25(OH)D < 25 nmol/L), only 10% achieved a level of 25(OH)D > 50 nmol/L. Overweight/obese participants (n = 9) had significantly lower mean plasma 25(OH)D concentration (22.3 ± 8.7 nmol/L) than normal weight participants (48.1 ± 34.3 nmol/L) (P = 0.043). There was a significant increase in plasma 25(OH)D concentration in vitamin D group compared with that in control group (P = 0.002) during the intervention period. The plasma 25(OH)D concentration in vitamin D group was increased at 6 weeks (from 38.4 ± 37.0 nmol/L at baseline to 51.0 ± 38.2 nmol/L) with little change observed between 6 and 12 weeks (51.8 ± 36.4 nmol/L). The plasma creatinine concentration in vitamin D group was significantly decreased compared with the control group (P = 0.036) (79.8 ± 7.0 μmol/L at baseline vs 75.1 ± 5.4 μmol/L at week 12). No significant effect of vitamin D supplementation was determined on immunological parameters.ConclusionVitamin D deficiency is common among the aging population in the UK even during the summertime. Vitamin D supplementation at 1,000 IU/day for 12 weeks significantly increased plasma 25(OH)D concentration but showed no effect on metabolic and immunological parameters except decreased plasma creatinine.

Abstract Purpose To investigate changes in 24‐h energy expenditure (EE), substrate oxidation, and body composition following resistance exercise (RE) and a high protein diet via whey protein supplementation (alone and combined) in healthy older men. Methods In a pooled groups analysis, 33 healthy older men [(mean ± SE) age: 67 ± 1 years; BMI: 25.4 ± 0.4 kg/m2] were randomized to either RE (2×/week; n = 17) or non‐exercise (n = 16) and either a high protein diet via whey protein supplementation (PRO, 2 × 25 g whey protein isolate/d; n = 17) or control (CON, 2 × 23.75 g maltodextrin/d; n = 16). An exploratory sub‐analysis was also conducted between RE+CON (n = 8) and RE+PRO (n = 9). At baseline and 12 weeks, participants resided in respiration chambers for measurement of 24‐h EE and substrate oxidation and wore an accelerometer for 7 days for estimation of free‐living EE. Results Resistance exercise resulted in greater increases in fat‐free mass (1.0 ± 0.3 kg), resting metabolic rate [(RMR) 36 ± 14 kcal/d], sedentary EE (60 ± 33 kcal/d), and sleeping metabolic rate [(SMR) 45 ± 7 kcal/d] compared to non‐exercise (p

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of saponified paprika extract, containing capsanthin as main carotenoid source, for poultry for fattening and laying (except turkeys). The saponified paprika (Capsicum annuum) extract contains various carotenoids at a concentration of 25–90 g/kg of which capsanthin being the major one with quantity specified as > 35% of total carotenoids (TC). The maximum recommended use level of 40 mg TC/kg feed is safe for chickens for fattening and laying hens. The margin of safety is at least 6. This conclusion is extrapolated to minor poultry species for fattening and laying. The saponified paprika extract is not genotoxic. Based on the no observed effect level (NOEL) of the 90‐day study in rat and the exposure estimates, the Panel considered that there would be an adequate margin of exposure (between 700 and 2000) to conclude that the level of exposure to residues of the saponified paprika (C. annuum) extract (capsanthin not less than 35% of TCs) in animal tissues and products does not raise concern for the safety for the consumer. The saponified paprika extract is a viscous paste and as such users will not be exposed by inhalation. The applicant recognises that the extract may be irritant to skin and eyes. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of any preparation to be toxic by inhalation, skin/eye irritant or skin sensitiser since no data were submitted. The use of saponified paprika extract in poultry feed raised no concern for the environment. Saponified paprika extract has the potential to pigment broiler skin and egg yolk. This conclusion is extrapolated to minor poultry species for fattening and laying.

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of astaxanthin‐dimethyldisuccinate (ATX‐DMDS) for salmonids, crustaceans and other fish. The applicant has provided evidence that ATX‐DMDS currently on the market complies with the conditions of authorisation for salmon and trout. ATX and ATX‐DMDS are safe for salmonids, crustaceans and fish up to 100 mg ATX/kg complete diet, corresponding to 138 mg ATX‐DMDS/kg. The FEEDAP Panel re‐assessed the toxicological profile of ATX based on data already considered in 2014, the literature review performed by the applicant and the data available in the context of an EFSA public call for data on ATX. The acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0.2 mg astaxanthin/kg body weight (bw) per day obtained by applying an uncertainty factor of 200 to a lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) of 40 mg/kg bw per day for the increased incidence of multinucleated hepatocytes observed in a 2‐year carcinogenicity study replaces the one of 0.034 mg/kg bw established by the FEEDAP Panel in 2014. The use of ATX‐DMDS in the nutrition of salmonids, other fish and crustaceans up to the maximum permitted dietary level is of no concern for the safety of the consumer. No dermal or ocular risk for the users is likely to occur under practical conditions. In the absence of inhalation toxicology study, the Panel is not in the position to establish the inhalation toxicity of the additive. The use of synthetic ATX‐DMDS does not pose a significant additional risk to the environment compared with natural astaxanthin. ATX‐DMDS is efficacious in colouring the flesh of salmonids and other fish. ATX‐DMDS is an effective pigment for crustaceans at the proposed conditions of use.

Abstract 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 65 mg/kg complete feed and a recommended maximum level of 105 mg/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 Panel concludes that the use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for consumers. The FEEDAP Panel considered 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 65 mg/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.

Abstract 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 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 10,000 mg/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 3,000 mg additive/kg complete feed, and keeping the same other conditions as for the use already authorised. The FEEDAP Panel assessed already the safety of the product when used in pigs for fattening in 2007 and 2017. The Panel confirms its former assessments that VevoVitall® used as a feed additive in pigs for fattening at the maximum level of 10,000 mg/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 Panel concluded that VevoVitall® has the potential to increase the performance in pigs for fattening at the level of 3,000 mg/kg complete feed.

Abstract The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) evaluated (i) lutein from a saponified extract from Tagetes erecta obtained via extraction and saponification (lutein not less than 85% of total carotenoids (TC)) and (ii) lutein/zeaxanthin extract from Tagetes erecta obtained via extraction, saponification and isomerisation (lutein not less than 45% and zeaxanthin not less than 35% of TC). The maximum proposed use level of 80 mg TC from saponified Tagetes extract/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening and laying hens is safe for these animal categories. This conclusion can be extrapolated to minor poultry species for fattening and laying. The conclusions on saponified Tagetes extract for poultry for fattening and laying are extended to the saponified/isomerised Tagetes extract. The maximum use level of the saponified/isomerised Tagetes extract in breeding minor poultry should not exceed 50 mg TC/kg feed, considering the toxicological potential of zeaxanthin on reproduction. The saponified Tagetes extract is not genotoxic. This conclusion is extended to the saponified/isomerised Tagetes extract. Consumer exposure related to the consumption of animal products is very low compared to the exposure from other sources. The active substance is a viscous paste and may be irritant to skin and eyes; no exposure by inhalation is expected. In the absence of data, the Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the user of commercial preparations. The use of Tagetes extracts in poultry feed raised no concern for the environment. Tagetes extracts at levels up to the proposed maximum use level of 80 mg TC/kg complete feed have the potential to colour the egg yolk of laying hens and the skin of chickens for fattening. This conclusion is extended to minor poultry species for laying and for fattening. The use of the additive in feed and water for drinking is considered bioequivalent.

Abstract The additive (trade name Biomin® DC‐C) is a blend of essential oils from oregano (Origanum vulgare L.) and from caraway seed (Carum carvi 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 75 mg/kg complete feed and a recommended maximum level of 125 mg/kg complete feed. A tolerance test in which piglets were exposed to feed containing up to an intended 1,250 mg 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 Panel considered that exposure to users by inhalation is unlikely; in the absence of data, the Panel cannot 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 75 mg/kg complete feed.

Abstract The additive sorbitan monolaurate consists of sorbitol (and its anhydrides) esterified with fatty acids derived from coconut oil. It is intended to be used as a technological additive, functional group: emulsifier, in feedingstuffs for all animal species, at a maximum concentration of 85 mg/kg complete feed. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that sorbitan monolaurate is safe for all animal species at the proposed maximum content of 85 mg/kg complete feed and that the use of sorbitan monolaurate in animal nutrition is not expected to pose a risk for the consumer under the proposed conditions of use. Users are unlikely to be exposed to sorbitan monolaurate via inhalation. Sorbitan monolaurate is irritant to skin and eyes and it is not considered a skin sensitiser. Owing the lack of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of the additive for the environment. Sorbitan monolaurate is authorised for use as a food additive with the function of emulsifier. The technological effect underlying its use as a food additive could reasonably be expected to be seen when used in feed.

Abstract 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.

Abstract 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.

Exposure to high levels of glucose and iron are co-related to reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and dysregulation of insulin synthesis and secretion, although the precise mechanisms are not well clarified. The focus of this study was to examine the consequences of exposure to high iron levels on MIN6 β-cells. MIN6 pseudoislets were exposed to 20 µM (control) or 100 µM (high) iron at predefined glucose levels (5.5 mM and 11 mM) at various time points (3, 24, 48, and 72 h). Total iron content was estimated by a colourimetric FerroZine™ assay in presence or absence of transferrin-bound iron. Cell viability was assessed by a resazurin dye-based assay, and ROS-mediated cellular oxidative stress was assessed by estimating malondialdehyde levels. β-cell iron absorption was determined by a ferritin immunoassay. Cellular insulin release and content was measured by an insulin immunoassay. Expression of SNAP-25, a key protein in the core SNARE complex that modulates vesicle exocytosis, was measured by immunoblotting. Our results demonstrate that exposure to high iron levels resulted in a 15-fold (48 h) and 4-fold (72 h) increase in cellular iron accumulation. These observations were consistent with data from oxidative stress analysis which demonstrated 2.7-fold higher levels of lipid peroxidation. Furthermore, exposure to supraphysiological (11 mM) levels of glucose and high iron (100 µM) at 72 h exerted the most detrimental effect on the MIN6 β-cell viability. The effect of high iron exposure on total cellular iron content was identical in the presence or absence of transferrin. High iron exposure (100 µM) resulted in a decrease of MIN6 insulin secretion (64% reduction) as well as cellular insulin content (10% reduction). Finally, a significant reduction in MIN6 β-cell SNAP-25 protein expression was evident at 48 h upon exposure to 100 µM iron. Our data suggest that exposure to high iron and glucose concentrations results in cellular oxidative damage and may initiate insulin secretory dysfunction in pancreatic β-cells by modulation of the exocytotic machinery.

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is key for the maintenance of normal neuronal function and energy homeostasis and has been suggested to improve cognitive function, including learning and memory. Iron and the antioxidant curcumin have been shown to influence BDNF homeostasis. This 6-week, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study examined the effects of oral iron supplementation at low (18 mg) and high (65 mg) ferrous (FS) iron dosages, compared to a combination of these iron doses with a bioavailable formulated form of curcumin (HydroCurcTM; 500 mg) on BDNF levels in a healthy adult cohort of 155 male (26.42 years ± 0.55) and female (25.82 years ± 0.54) participants. Participants were randomly allocated to five different treatment groups: both iron and curcumin placebo (FS0+Plac), low dose iron and curcumin placebo (FS18+Plac), low dose iron and curcumin (FS18+Curc), high dose iron and curcumin placebo (FS65+Plac) and high dose iron and curcumin (FS65+Curc). Results showed a significant increase in BDNF over time (26%) in the FS18+Curc group (p = 0.024), and at end-point between FS18+Curc and FS18+Plac groups (35%, p = 0.042), demonstrating for the first time that the combination with curcumin, rather than iron supplementation alone, results in increased serum BDNF. The addition of curcumin to iron supplementation may therefore provide a novel approach to further enhance the benefits associated with increased BDNF levels.

Abstract Lantharenol® is a feed additive consisting of lanthanum carbonate octahydrate. It is currently authorised as a zootechnical additive (decrease in phosphorous excretion via urine) for cats; this opinion concerns the renewal of the authorisation. In 2007, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) adopted an opinion on the safety and efficacy of Lantharenol® as a feed additive for cats. The applicant has provided data demonstrating that the additive complies with the conditions of authorisation. The available evidence, including the results of the post‐market monitoring plan, confirms that the use of Lantharenol® in cat food at the maximum authorised concentration of 7.5 g/kg of complete feed is safe for cats. In the absence of new data, the FEEDAP Panel reiterates its previous conclusion that Lantharenol® does not pose a risk by inhalation and is not an irritant to skin or eye and not a dermal sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel considers that there is no need for a continuation of a specific post‐market monitoring plan.

Abstract The additive under assessment is pure benzoic acid (> 99.8%), manufactured in the form of flakes. It is intended to be used as a technological feed additive (acidity regulator) in feedingstuffs for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening, with maximum contents of 5,000 and 10,000 mg/kg complete feed, respectively. Benzoic acid is safe for weaned piglets at 5,000 mg/kg complete feed, and at 10,000 mg/kg complete feed for pigs for fattening. The use of benzoic acid in feedingstuffs for piglets and pigs for fattening at the maximum application rate will not affect exposure of consumers to residues or metabolites of concern via food from treated animals. Therefore, the use of benzoic acid as technological additive in feeds for pigs to a maximum inclusion level of 10,000 mg/kg is considered safe for consumers. Benzoic acid is a skin and eye irritant but is not considered to be a skin sensitiser. Exposure via inhalation is unlikely. The use of benzoic acid in feedingstuffs for piglets and pigs for fattening will not pose a risk for the environment. Benzoic acid is efficacious as an acidity regulator in feedingstuffs for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening.

Abstract The additive cassia gum consists mainly of high‐molecular weight polysaccharides composed primarily of a linear chain of 1,4‐β‐d‐mannopyranose units with 1,6‐linked α‐d‐galactopyranose units. In 2014, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of cassia gum in cats and dogs. The Panel concluded, based on positive findings observed in a bacterial reverse mutation test with a semi‐refined cassia gum (about 70 mg anthraquinones/kg) but not with purified semi‐refined cassia gum that meets the specification as a food additive (

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the modification of the terms of authorisation of lecithins as a feed additive for all animal species. Lecithins are currently authorised for use in feed for all animal species (Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/2325). The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion of the additive lecithins in 2016. The Panel concluded that lecithins are safe for the target species, the consumer, the user and the environment, and that they are efficacious as emulsifier. The requested modification refers to the alignment of the specifications of the feed additive to the specifications set for lecithins when used as food additives, and the inclusion in the authorisation of rapeseed among the botanical sources of hydrolysed and de‐oiled lecithins and of de‐oiled hydrolysed soybean lecithins as an additional form of the additive. Based on the data available, all the lecithins of different botanical origin and their forms under application meet the specifications set for the use of lecithins as a food additive. The Panel therefore recommended applying the specifications set for food additive to the lecithins under application. In its previous opinion, the Panel concluded that lecithins are safe for the target species, the consumer, the user and the environment, and that they are efficacious as an emulsifier. The Panel is not aware of any information related to the use of rapeseed as an additional source of hydrolysed liquid lecithins and de‐oiled lecithin powder that would modify the previous conclusions.

Abstract The additive under assessment consists of a natural mixture, mainly composed of dolomite (~ 30%), magnesite (~ 20%) and magnesium‐phyllosilicates (talc (~ 35%) and chlorite (~ 15%)). In 2016, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of natural mixture of dolomite plus magnesite and magnesium‐phyllosilicates. In this opinion, the Panel concluded that 20,000 mg additive/kg complete feed is considered safe for dairy cows and for piglets (weaned). This conclusion was extended to pigs for fattening while no conclusion could be drawn on the safety for poultry or any other species/categories. Following this opinion, the European Commission gave the possibility to the applicant to submit complementary information in order to complete the assessment on the safety for all animal species. The new tolerance studies submitted with cattle for fattening and chickens for fattening showed tolerance of these animal categories to the additive up to approximately fivefold the highest recommended use level. The FEEDAP Panel therefore concluded that 20,000 mg additive/kg complete feed is safe for cattle for fattening and chickens for fattening. The additive at the same dietary concentration was already considered safe in an earlier opinion for piglets and dairy cows. Since the additive at 20,000 mg/kg complete feed is considered safe for four animal categories (three major animal species) with a comparable margin of safety, the conclusion on safety is extrapolated to all animal species. At the safe dietary concentration the additive did not affect the digestibility of the feed (including feed additives).

Abstract Fumonisin esterase produced from a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffi 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 300 U/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 10 U/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 Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considers the additive efficacious for all poultry and all pigs.

Abstract 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 1,000 mg/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 Panel on 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 Panel concluded 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 Panel extends 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 Panel recommended to set a specification for the DMAE content in the additive.

Abstract l‐Glutamic acid, N,N‐diacetic acid, tetrasodium salt (GLDA‐Na4) (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‐Na4, respectively. Kelforce® is safe for chickens for fattening at the maximum level of 1,000 mg GLDA‐Na4/kg complete feed. Based on the toxicological profile of GLDA‐Na4 and the consumer exposure to GLDA‐Na4 and to nitrilotriacetic acid trisodium salt (NTA‐Na3; 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‐Na4 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 Panel cannot 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 Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) cannot conclude on the efficacy of the additive. The Panel made a recommendation regarding the levels of formaldehyde and cyanide in the active substance.

Abstract The additive consists of single strains of Bacillus subtilis and Aspergillus oryzae, to be used in combination as a technological additive (proposed functional group: Substances for the reduction of anti‐nutritional factors) in feed materials for all animal species. An opinion on the two microorganisms was published previously. At this time, the safety of the B. subtilis strain for target animals, consumers, users and the environment was established, but no conclusions could be draw on the safety of the strain of A. oryzae for the target species and consumers or on the efficacy of the additive in reducing anti‐nutritional factors. This opinion considers new information intended to address the identified deficiencies in the previous opinion. An extensive analytical search for secondary metabolites was made of the A. oryzae component of the additive and 15 metabolites were detected and quantified. Of the 15 metabolites, 13 occurred in ng/g additive concentrations and were considered not to be of concern. The remaining two compounds, cyclic dipeptides (2,5‐diketopiperazines), were detected at concentrations up to 1.5 mg/kg. Both have been identified in a wide range of foods and beverages and there appears to be no reports of adverse reactions to such cyclic dipeptides in processed food. Consequently, none of the metabolites detected were considered likely to cause adverse effects in target animals fed treated feed material or in consumers of products derived from such animals. Data from the analysis of 18 batches of soybean before and after treatment with the two strains were presented in support of the efficacy of the additive. Two classes of anti‐nutritional factors were considered; oligosaccharides of the raffinose series and trypsin inhibitor. The microbial strains in combination were able to substantially reduce the concentration of oligosaccharides and trypsin inhibitor naturally present in soybean. Other feed materials were not considered.

Abstract The additive is a natural mixture of talc and chlorite (NTMC) that contains at least 75% of talc and chlorite as main components. The additive is intended for use as a technological additive (functional groups: (i) anticaking agents) in premixtures and feedingstuffs for all animal species at use levels of 1,000–50,000 mg/kg. No safe dietary level of NMTC could be identified for piglets, chickens for fattening and dairy cows. The use of NMTC in animal nutrition is considered not to pose a risk for the consumer of animal tissues and products from animals fed the additive. Talc could cause serious lung disease if repeatedly inhaled in large quantities over a long period. Talc is not irritant to skin and eyes. In the absence of data, no conclusion can be drawn on the skin sensitisation potential of the product. The components of the additive (talc, chlorite, dolomite and magnesite) are ubiquitous in the environment, being natural components of soil. Therefore, it is not expected that its use as a feed additive would adversely affect the environment. The additive NMTC is efficacious as an anticaking agent.

Abstract The Panel on 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 2,500 mg/kg feed, and for laying hens, turkeys and chickens for fattening at 500 mg/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.

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of ponceau 4R for cats, dogs and ornamental fish. The following ponceau 4R concentrations in complete feed were considered safe: 31 mg/kg for cats, 37 mg/kg for dogs and 137 mg/kg for ornamental fish. Inhalation exposure of ponceau 4R is regarded as hazardous. In the absence of data, the Panel cannot conclude on the irritancy potential of ponceau 4R to skin or eyes. No conclusion could be made on the skin sensitisation of ponceau 4R. Ponceau 4R is effective in adding colour to feedingstuffs.

Abstract Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) is a waxy solid consisting for > 98.5% of the active substance, a mixture of 3‐tert‐butyl‐4‐hydroxyanisole and 2‐tert‐butyl‐4‐hydroxyanisole. It is intended to be used as an antioxidant in feedingstuffs for all animal species and categories. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considered BHA up to 150 mg/kg complete feed as safe for all animal species except for cats, for which a safe dose could not be established from the tolerance data. BHA is rapidly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract; it is metabolised rapidly and excreted as such and as metabolites in the urine and faeces. The proportions of the different metabolites vary depending on species and dose. No accumulation of BHA or metabolites was observed in tissues. The Panel concluded that no concern for consumer safety would arise from the use of BHA as a feed additive at the maximum concentration of 150 mg/kg feed. The additive should be considered a skin, eye irritant and a potential skin sensitiser. Exposure of the user via inhalation was considered unlikely; therefore, a risk is not expected. The use of BHA at the maximum concentration proposed is unlikely to pose a risk to the environment. BHA is authorised as an antioxidant for food use at comparable use levels, therefore, no studies were required to demonstrate the efficacy of BHA as an antioxidant in feedingstuffs for all animal species.

Abstract The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) received a request from the European Commission to assess the safety and efficacy of bentonite when used as a technological feed additive (substances for reduction of the contamination of feed by mycotoxins) for all animal species. The applicant, EUBA aisbl (European Bentonite Association) representing six companies, submitted to EFSA a technical dossier to support the application. The applicant proposes to use bentonite at the maximum level of 20,000 mg/kg complete feed. The additive apparently interferes with the analysis of aflatoxin B1 in feed. The safety of the additive was already evaluated by the Panel in an opinion delivered in 2012. Bentonites are safe for all animal species, the consumers and the environment when used at a maximum level of 20,000 mg/kg complete feed. The results of a new genotoxicity study reinforced the previous conclusion that smectites are non‐genotoxic. Bentonites are not skin irritants but might be mildly irritant to the eye; based on a new study submitted, the additive is not a skin sensitiser. Owing to its silica content, the additive is a hazard by inhalation for the users. The in vitro study showed that the di‐ and tri‐octahedral smectites tested can adsorb aflatoxin B1 at different concentrations and at pH 5; however, no adequate in vivo studies were available. Therefore, the Panel cannot draw conclusions on the additive's efficacy. The Panel further considers the safety and efficacy conclusions to apply equally to the di‐ and tri‐octahedral smectites under assessment. The FEEDAP Panel posted some recommendations regarding the maximum content of other minerals in the additive and the incompatibilities of the additive with other medicinal substances. The Panel also drew a remark concerning the denomination of the additive and the current regulatory definition of Bentonite.

Abstract VevoVitall® is a feed additive consisting of benzoic acid. It is currently authorised as a zootechnical additive for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening. This opinion concerns the renewal of the authorisation of benzoic acid as a zootechnical additive in feed. In 2005 and 2017, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) adopted two opinions on the safety and efficacy of VevoVitall® as a feed additive for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening, respectively. The applicant has provided data demonstrating that the additive currently in the market complies with the conditions of authorisation. Furthermore, according to the information provided in the technical dossier, no new evidence has been identified that would make the FEEDAP Panel reconsidering the previous conclusions on the safety of the additive. The Panel confirms that the additive is safe at the maximum authorised concentrations of 5,000 and 10,000 mg/kg feed for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening, respectively; a margin of safety cannot be determined for weaned piglets while a margin of safety of less than 1.5 is established for pigs for fattening. The use of VevoVitall® in feeds for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening at the maximum authorised concentrations does not pose any safety concern for consumers and the environment. The use of VevoVitall® does not pose a risk by inhalation to users and is not a skin sensitiser. The new available data confirm that the additive is a skin irritant and a severe eye irritant. A recommendation concerning the potential toluene residues in the additive has been posted.

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on VevoVitall® (benzoic acid) as a feed additive for minor porcine species, when used as zootechnical additive at a maximum level of 5,000 mg/kg complete feed. The safety and efficacy of the additive had been evaluated by the FEEDAP Panel on weaned piglets (at the maximum supplementation level of 5,000 mg/kg complete feed) and pigs for fattening and pigs for reproduction (at the maximum level of 10,000 mg/kg complete feed). Subsequent to EFSA's assessments, the additive has been authorised for use in feed of weaned piglets, pigs for fattening and sows. To the knowledge of the FEEDAP Panel, there was no new information that might modify its previous assessments on VevoVitall® concerning safety for consumers and the environment; therefore, this opinion focused only on the safety of the target animals and the efficacy of the product. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that VevoVitall® is safe at the supplementation level of 5,000 mg/kg complete feed for minor porcine species for fattening and for reproduction; the FEEDAP could not conclude on the safety of the additive for weaned minor porcine species. VevoVitall® does not represent a risk for the consumer and the environment. VevoVitall® does not pose a risk by inhalation to users and is not skin sensitiser, but is a skin irritant and a severe eye irritant. VevoVitall® has the potential to decrease the urinary pH in minor porcine species at the dose of 5,000 mg/kg complete feed. A remark on the relevance of the claim has been posted by the Panel.

Abstract AviMatrix® (benzoic acid, calcium formate and fumaric acid) is intended to be used as a zootechnical additive (functional group: other zootechnical additives) in feed of chickens for fattening, chickens reared for laying, minor avian species for fattening and minor avian species reared to point of lay to increase performance. The additive has not been authorised in the EU. In 2014, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) adopted an opinion in which, owing to insufficient tolerance data and the limited and inconsistent evidence of efficacy, a definitive conclusion on the safety and efficacy of the additive as a zootechnical additive could not be drawn. Additional data have been provided by the applicant related to the safety and the efficacy of the additive for the target species, which is the subject of this opinion. The FEEDAP Panel considers that the additive is tolerated by chickens for fattening up to the maximum recommended dose (1,000 mg/kg complete feed); this conclusion can be extended to chickens reared for laying. However, since no conclusion could be drawn on the margin of safety, the safety of the additive to minor avian species for fattening and to point of lay cannot be extrapolated. Data from three trials provided evidence that AviMatrix® at 500 mg/kg complete feed had the potential to improve the performance of chickens for fattening. The dose proposed for use with chickens reared for laying and minor poultry species for fattening and to point of lay is the same as that demonstrated being efficacious in a physiologically similar major species (chickens for fattening) and it can be reasonably assumed that the mode of action is the same. Consequently, the conclusion on efficacy for chickens for fattening can be extended to chickens reared for laying and extrapolated to minor poultry species for fattening and to point of lay.

Abstract The additives under assessment are lactic acid and calcium lactate. In 2015, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an Opinion on the safety and efficacy of lactic acid and calcium lactate. The FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of lactic acid in pre‐ruminants and poultry. Following this opinion, the European Commission gave the possibility to the applicant to submit complementary information in order to complete the assessment on the safety for all animal species. Based on the studies submitted in chickens for fattening and laying hens, no safe concentration of lactic acid and calcium lactate in complete feed for these species could be identified. Owing to the absence of data on tolerated dietary levels of d‐lactic acid, no conclusion on the safety of lactic acid in milk replacer for pre‐ruminants is possible. Since a safe concentration of lactic acid (and calcium lactate) was established only for pigs and cattle, and not for a third major animal species, no extrapolation to any other species is possible.

Abstract The additive under assessment is a natural mixture mainly composed of illite (~ 53%), montmorillonite (~ 16%) and kaolinite (~ 17%). In 2016, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an Opinion on the safety and efficacy of a natural mixture of illite, montmorillonite and kaolinite (MIMK). The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for piglets and pigs for fattening at a maximum concentration of 20,000 mg/kg, and for cattle for fattening at a maximum concentration of 50,000 mg/kg. However, no conclusion could be drawn for all other species/categories. The Panel also concluded that the additive is efficacious at a minimum concentration of 50,000 mg/kg. Following this opinion, the European Commission gave the possibility to the applicant to submit complementary information in order to complete the assessment on the safety for all animal species and on its efficacy at a minimum concentration of 20,000 mg/kg. The applicant submitted a new tolerance study in piglets and an analysis of the previous EFSA opinion regarding poultry and milk‐producing animals. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe for piglets and pigs for fattening at 50,000 mg/kg. The Panel concluded that the safe level (50,000 mg/kg) found for cattle for fattening could be extrapolated to minor growing ruminants. The conclusion could be extrapolated to dairy cows and minor ruminant species for milk production. The FEEDAP Panel confirmed that no safe concentration of MIMK in feed for chickens for fattening could be identified. No conclusions could be drawn for all the other animal species/categories. The additive is effective as a pellet binder and an anticaking agent at the lowest level tested of 5,000 mg/kg feed.

Abstract Sodium and potassium alginate are intended to be used as technological additives (functional groups: emulsifiers, stabilisers, thickeners, gelling agents and binders). Sodium alginate is intended to be used in feedingstuffs for pets, other non food‐producing animals and fish, with no maximum recommended use level. Potassium alginate is intended to be used in feedingstuffs for cats and dogs at levels up to 40,000 mg/kg feed (on dry matter). Since the functional properties of the additives are determined by the alginate content, sodium and potassium alginate were considered equivalent. The maximum dose considered safe for cats, dogs, other non food‐producing animals, salmonids and other fish is 40,000 mg alginates (sodium and potassium salts)/kg complete feed. The use of alginates in feedingstuffs for fish is of no concern for the consumer. Alginates are reported not to be irritant to the skin but mildly irritant to the eyes. They are considered as potential sensitisers to the skin and the respiratory tract. Alginates are high‐molecular‐weight polymers naturally occurring in brown algae. Their use in feedingstuffs for fish does not pose a risk for the aquatic environment. Alginates are effective as stabilisers, thickeners, gelling agent and binders. No conclusion could be drawn on the efficacy of alginates as emulsifiers.

Abstract 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 Panel on 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 Panel could 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 Panel to 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 100 mg/kg complete feed. Considering the results of the current study, along with the two efficacy studies already assessed in the previous FEEDAP Panel opinion of 2015, the Panel concludes that Liderfeed® at 100 mg/kg complete feed has the potential to improve the growth of chickens for fattening.

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of annatto F (alkali‐processed norbixin, acid‐precipitated) for cats and dogs. Norbixin is considered safe for cats at a maximum concentration of 13 mg/kg complete feed and for dogs at 16 mg/kg complete feed. Annatto 2.5% is a strong alkaline solution of potassium or sodium hydroxide that makes it corrosive and therefore harmful for the user. Although the ability of the additive to colour feed has generally been demonstrated, no conclusion on the effective concentration can be drawn.

Abstract The additive cassia gum consists mainly of high‐molecular weight polysaccharides composed primarily of a linear chain of 1,4‐β‐d‐mannopyranose units with 1,6‐linked α‐d‐galactopyranose units. In 2014, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of cassia gum. The FEEDAP Panel concluded, based on positive findings observed in a bacterial reverse mutation test with a semirefined cassia gum (about 70 mg anthraquinones/kg) but not with purified semirefined cassia gum that meets the specification as a food additive (

Abstract The additive under assessment consists of a natural mixture, mainly composed of dolomite (~ 30%), magnesite (~ 20%) and magnesium‐phyllosilicates (talc (~ 35%) and chlorite (~ 15%)). In 2016, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of natural mixture of dolomite plus magnesite and magnesium‐phyllosilicates. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe in complete feed for dairy cows, piglets and pigs for fattening at a maximum concentration of 20,000 mg/kg. However, no conclusions could be drawn for all other animal species/categories. Following this opinion, the European Commission gave the possibility to the applicant to submit complementary information in order to complete the assessment on the safety for all animal species. The applicant answered with a new submission, an analysis of the previous EFSA opinion, but without new data. The FEEDAP Panel considered the arguments made by the applicant, in relation to the tolerance studies with dairy cows and chickens for fattening. No reason was identified to modify the conclusions reached in the previous opinion.

Abstract The additive cassia gum consists mainly of high‐molecular weight polysaccharides composed primarily of a linear chain of 1,4‐β‐d‐mannopyranose units with 1,6‐linked α‐d‐galactopyranose units. In 2014, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) delivered an opinion on the safety and efficacy of cassia gum. The FEEDAP Panel concluded, based on positive findings observed in a bacterial reverse mutation test with a semirefined cassia gum (about 70 mg anthraquinones/kg) but not with purified semirefined cassia gum that meets the specification as a food additive (