Search

Abstract The food enzyme α‐amylase (4‐α‐d‐glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) is produced with the non‐genetically modified microorganism Bacillus licheniformis strain AE‐TA by Amano Enzyme Inc. A safety evaluation of this food enzyme was made previously, in which EFSA concluded that this food enzyme did not give rise to safety concerns when used in eight food manufacturing processes. Subsequently, the applicant has requested to extend its use to include one additional process and to revise the use levels. In this assessment, EFSA updated the safety evaluation of this food enzyme when used in a total of nine food manufacturing processes. As the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) are removed from the final foods in two food manufacturing processes, the dietary exposure to the food enzyme–TOS was estimated only for the remaining seven processes. Dietary exposure was calculated to be up to 0.382 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. Based on the data provided for the previous evaluation and the revised dietary exposure in the present evaluation, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the revised intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme triacylglycerol lipase (triacylglycerol acylhydrolase; EC 3.1.1.3) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Penicillium caseifulvum strain AE‐LRF by Amano Enzyme Inc. The food enzyme was free from viable cells of the production organism. It is intended to be used in four food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.013 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 69 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 5308. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. However, the Panel noted that traces of ■■■■■, used in the manufacture of the triacylglycerol lipase, may be found in the food enzyme. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure could not be excluded, particularly in individuals sensitised to fish. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme laccase (benzenediol:oxygen oxidoreductase, i.e. EC 1.10.3.2) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Trametes hirsuta strain AE‐OR by Amano Enzyme Inc. A safety evaluation of this food enzyme was made previously, in which EFSA concluded that this food enzyme did not give rise to safety concerns when used in six food manufacturing processes. Subsequently, the applicant has requested to extend its use to include three additional processes and to revise the use levels. In this assessment, EFSA updated the safety evaluation of this food enzyme when used in a total of nine food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was calculated to be up to 0.030 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Using the no observed adverse effect level previously reported (862 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested), the Panel derived a margin of exposure of at least 28,733. Based on the data provided for the previous evaluation and the revised margin of exposure in the present evaluation, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the revised intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme subtilisin (EC 3.4.21.62) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Bacillus paralicheniformis strain AP‐01 by Nagase (Europa) GmbH. It was considered free from viable cells of the production organism. The food enzyme is intended to be used in five food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of food enzyme‐total organic solids (TOS) are removed in one process, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining four food manufacturing processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.875 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. The production strain of the food enzyme has the capacity to produce bacitracin and thus failed to meet the requirements of the Qualified Presumption of Safety approach. Bacitracin was detected in the industrial fermentation medium but not in the food enzyme itself. However, the limit of detection of the analytical method used for bacitracin was not sufficient to exclude the possible presence of bacitracin at a level representing a risk for the development of antimicrobial resistant bacteria. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and twenty‐eight matches with respiratory allergens, one match with a contact allergen and two matches with food allergens (melon and pomegranate) were found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals sensitised to melon or pomegranate, cannot be excluded, but would not exceed the risk of consuming melon or pomegranate. Based on the data provided, the Panel could not exclude the presence of bacitracin, a medically important antimicrobial, and consequently the safety of this food enzyme could not be established.

Abstract The food enzyme phospholipase A2 (phosphatidylcholine 2‐acylhydrolase, EC 3.1.1.4) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus niger strain PLA by DSM Food Specialties B.V. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in the processing of egg and egg products, in the processing of fats and oils by degumming and for the production of modified lecithins (lysolecithin). As residual total organic solids (TOS) are removed in the refined fats and oils during degumming, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining two food manufacturing processes. For egg processing, the dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 1.712 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Wet gum can be used to produce lysolecithin with the highest dietary exposure of 1.61 mg TOS/kg bw per day in children at the 95th percentile when used as a food additive. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 1350 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated overall dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 851. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to those of known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme asparaginase (l‐asparagine amidohydrolase, EC 3.5.1.1) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus oryzae strain NZYM‐SP by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is considered free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used to prevent acrylamide formation in food processing. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.101 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 880 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 8,713. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that a risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme α‐amylase (4‐α‐D‐glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) is produced with the non‐genetically modified microorganism Bacillus licheniformis strain T74 by Novozymes A/S. The production strain met the qualifications of the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The food enzyme is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes: starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and other starch hydrolysates, distilled alcohol production, refined and unrefined sugar production, brewing processes, cereal‐based processes, fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juices and the production of dairy analogues. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during two food processes (starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and other starch hydrolysates, distilled alcohol production), dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining six food manufacturing processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.291 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. Since the production strain meets the requirements for the QPS approach and no issues of concern arose from the production process of the food enzyme, the Panel considered that toxicological studies were unnecessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded (except for distilled alcohol production), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase (4‐β‐d‐xylan xylanohydrolase, EC 3.2.1.8) is produced with the genetically modified microorganism Bacillus subtilis strain XAN by DSM Food Specialties B.V. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. The production strain of the food enzyme contains antimicrobial resistance genes. However, based on the absence of viable cells and DNA from the production organism in the food enzyme, this is not considered to be a risk. The food enzyme is intended to be used in baking processes and cereal‐based processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.02 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. As no other concerns arising from the microbial source and its subsequent genetic modification or from the manufacturing process have been identified, the Panel considered that toxicological tests are not needed for the assessment of this food enzyme. A search for similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme pectinesterase (pectin pectylhydrolase; EC 3.1.1.11) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus niger strain PME by DSM Food Specialties B.V. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its recombinant DNA. It is intended to be used in fruit and vegetable processing, for juice production and fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juices. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.095 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. The toxicity studies were carried out with a xylanase obtained from A. niger strain XEA. The Panel considered this food enzyme as a suitable substitute for the pectinesterase to be used in the toxicological studies, because both production strains are derived from the same recipient strain, the location of the inserts is comparable, no partial inserts were present and the production methods are essentially the same. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 1,852 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, resulting in a margin of exposure of at least 19,495. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and two matches with pollen allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals sensitised to pollen allergens, cannot be excluded. The Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme ribonuclease P (EC 3.1.26.5) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Penicillium citrinum strain AE‐RP‐4 by Amano Enzyme Inc. It is intended to be used in yeast processing only for the production of yeast extract. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.153 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise safety concerns. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 134.7 mg TOS/kg bw per day, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 880. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract Food enzymes are used for technical purposes in the production of food ingredients or foods‐as‐consumed. In the European Union, the safety of a food enzyme is evaluated by EFSA on the basis of a technical dossier provided by an applicant. Dietary exposure is an integral part of the risk assessment of food enzymes. To develop exposure models specific to each food manufacturing process in which food enzymes are used, different input data are required which are then used in tandem with technical conversion factors. This allows the use levels of food enzyme to be related to food consumption data collected in dietary surveys. For each food manufacturing process, EFSA identified a list of food groups (FoodEx1 classification system) and collated technical conversion factors. To ensure a correct and uniform application of these input data in the assessment of food enzyme dossiers, stakeholders were consulted via open calls‐for‐data. In addition to publishing and updating the identified input parameters on an annual basis, single‐process‐specific calculators of the Food Enzyme Intake Models (FEIMs) have been developed. These calculators have been deposited at https://zenodo.org/ since 2018 for open access. By 2023, EFSA had compiled the input data for a total of 40 food manufacturing processes in which food enzymes are employed. In this document, the food manufacturing processes are structured, food groups classified initially in the FoodEx1 system are translated into the FoodEx2 system, and technical factors are adjusted to reflect the more detailed and standardised FoodEx2 nomenclature. The development of an integrated FEIM‐web tool using this collection of input data is released in 2024. This webtool is able to estimate the exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) when employed in single or multiple food manufacturing processes.

Abstract The food enzyme lysozyme (peptidoglycan N‐acetylmuramoylhydrolase; EC 3.2.1.17) is produced from hens' eggs by Bioseutica B.V. It is intended to be used in brewing processes, milk processing for cheese production as well as wine production. The dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 4.9 mg TOS/kg body weight per day. This exposure is lower than the intake of the corresponding fraction from eggs, for all population groups. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the residual amounts of lysozyme in treated beers, cheese and cheese products and wine, may trigger adverse allergenic reactions in susceptible individuals. Based on the data provided, the origin of the food enzyme and an exposure to the food enzyme comparable to the intake from eggs, the Panel concluded that the food enzyme lysozyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use, except for the known adverse allergic reactions that occur in susceptible individuals.

Abstract The food enzyme asparaginase (l‐asparagine amidohydrolase; EC 3.5.1.1) is produced with the genetically modified microorganism Aspergillus oryzae strain NZYM‐OA by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in various food manufacturing processes to prevent acrylamide formation. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.051 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 1,182 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 23,176. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme lysozyme (peptidoglycan N‐acetylmuramoylhydrolase; EC 3.2.1.17) is produced with hens' eggs and submitted by DSM Food Specialties BV. It is intended to be used in brewing processes, milk processing for cheese production as well as wine and vinegar production. The dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 4.9 mg TOS/kg body weight per day. This exposure is lower than the intake of the corresponding fraction from eggs, for all population groups. Egg lysozyme is a known food allergen. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the residual amounts of lysozyme in treated beers, cheese and cheese products as well as wine and wine vinegar may trigger adverse allergenic reactions in susceptible individuals. Based on the data provided, the origin of the food enzyme and an exposure to the food enzyme comparable to the intake from eggs, the Panel concluded that the food enzyme lysozyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use, except for the known adverse allergic reactions that occur in susceptible individuals.

Abstract The food enzyme pectinesterase (pectin pectylhydrolase; EC 3.1.1.11) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus oryzae strain AR‐962 by AB Enzymes GmbH. The genetic modifications did not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme was free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in five food manufacturing processes: fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juice, production of wine and wine vinegar, production of plant extracts as flavouring preparations and coffee demucilation. Since residual amounts of total organic solids are removed by repeated washing or distillation, dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) from the production of flavouring extracts and coffee demucilation was considered not necessary. For the remaining three food processes, dietary exposure to the food enzyme‐TOS was estimated to be up to 0.647 mg TOS/kg bw per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 1,000 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 1,546. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence to those of known allergens was made and two matches with pollen allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure, particularly in individuals sensitised to pollen allergens, cannot be excluded. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme containing endo‐polygalacturonase ((1–4)‐α‐d‐galacturonan glycanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.15) and cellulase (4‐(1,3;1,4)‐β‐d‐glucan 4‐glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.4) activities is produced with the non‐genetically modified Talaromyces cellulolyticus strain NITE BP‐03478 by Meiji Seika Pharma Co., Ltd. It is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes: baking processes, brewing processes, fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, wine and wine vinegar production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juices, fruit and vegetable processing for refined olive oil production, coffee bean demucilation and grain treatment for starch production. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during three food processes (refined olive oil production, coffee bean demucilation and grain treatment for starch production), dietary exposure was not calculated for these food processes. For the remaining five food processes, dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 3.193 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 806 mg TOS/kg bw per day, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 252. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequences of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and six matches with pollen allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, especially in individuals sensitised to pollen. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme 1,4‐α‐glucan branching enzyme ((1–4)‐α‐d‐glucan:(1–4)‐α‐d‐glucan 6‐α‐d‐[(1–4)‐α‐d‐glucano]‐transferase; EC 2.4.1.18) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Geobacillus thermodenitrificans strain TRBE14 by Nagase (Europa) GmbH. The production strain has been shown to qualify for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The food enzyme is intended to be used in cereal‐based processes, baking processes as well as meat and fish processing. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.29 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Toxicological studies were not considered necessary given the QPS status of the production strain and the nature of the manufacturing process. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel noted that the food enzyme contains lysozyme, a known allergen. Therefore, allergenicity cannot be excluded. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme phospholipase A2 (phosphatidylcholine 2‐acylhydrolase EC 3.1.1.4) is produced with the genetically modified Streptomyces violaceoruber strain AS‐10 by Nagase (Europa) GmbH. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in four food manufacturing processes, i.e. egg processing, baking processes, degumming of fats and oils and milk processing for cheese production. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed in degumming of fats and oils, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining three food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–TOS was estimated to be up to 0.41 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 191.2 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the mid‐dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, results in a margin of exposure above 460. A search for similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no matches were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood for this to occur is considered to be low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme endo‐polygalacturonase (1→4)‐α‐d‐galacturonan glycanohydrolase EC 3.2.1.15 is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus oryzae strain AR‐183 by AB ENZYMES GmbH. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in five food manufacturing processes: fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juice, production of wine and wine vinegar, production of plant extracts as flavouring preparations and coffee demucilation. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed by repeated washing or distillation, dietary exposure to the food enzyme TOS from coffee demucilation and from the production of flavouring extracts was considered not necessary. For the remaining three food processes, dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.087 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 1,000 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 11,494. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and two matches with pollen allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals sensitised to pollen allergens, cannot be excluded. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme triacylglycerol lipase (triacylglycerol acylhydrolase; EC 3.1.1.3) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Mucor circinelloides strain AE‐LMH by Amano Enzyme Inc. The food enzyme is considered free from viable cells of the production organism. The food enzyme is intended to be used in baking processes, egg processing and the manufacture of enzyme‐modified dairy ingredients (EMDI). Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.242 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 784 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, results in a margin of exposure of at least 3,240. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood of such reactions is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme endo‐1,3(4)‐β‐glucanase (3‐(1–3,1–4)‐β‐d‐glucan 3(4)‐glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.6) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Rasamsonia composticola 427‐FS strain by Kerry Ingredients & Flavours Ltd. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism. The food enzyme is intended to be used in six manufacturing processes, i.e. baking processes, other cereal‐based processes, brewing processes, grain treatment for the production of starch and gluten fractions, distilled alcohol production and yeast processing. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed by distillation and during grain processing, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining four processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.809 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 866 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 1,070. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme has two declared activities, endo‐polygalacuronase ((1→4)‐α‐D‐galacturonan glycanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.15) and endo‐1,3(4)‐β‐glucanase (3‐(1→3;1→4)‐β‐D‐glucan 3(4)‐glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.6) and is produced with the non‐genetically modified Aspergillus fijiensis strain NZYM‐RE by Novozymes A/S. The food enzyme was considered free from viable cells of the production organism. It is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes, i.e. distilled alcohol production, brewing processes, baking processes, cereal‐based processes, wine and wine vinegar production, fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juices and refined olive oil production. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during distilled alcohol production and refined olive oil production, dietary exposure was not calculated for these two processes. For the remaining six food manufacturing processes, dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.553 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 3,677 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, resulting in a margin of exposure of at least 6,649. A search for similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and nine matches were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use (other than distilled alcohol production), the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals suffering from the oral allergy syndrome or sensitised to papaya, cannot be excluded. The Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme containing cellulase (EC 3.2.1.4), endo‐1,3(4)‐β‐glucanase (EC 3.2.1.6) and endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase (EC 3.2.1.8) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Trichoderma reesei strain AR‐256 by AB‐Enzymes GmbH. The food enzyme is considered free from viable cells of the production organism. It is intended to be used in seven food manufacturing processes: baking processes, cereal‐based processes, brewing processes, fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, wine and wine vinegar production, distilled alcohol production and grain treatment for production of starch and gluten fractions. Since the residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during grain treatment and distilled alcohol production, dietary exposure was estimated for the remaining five processes and amounted up to 3.92 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day. The toxicity studies were carried out with an endo‐1,4‐β‐xylanase from T. reesei ■■■■■, considered by the Panel as a suitable substitute, because the genetic differences between the strains are well characterised and of no concern. Additionally, several strains derived from the production strain are considered safe by EFSA and the manufacturing of both food enzymes is similar. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity rat study. The no observed adverse effect level of 939 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure above 239. In the search for the similarity of the amino acid sequences to known allergens, one match (salmon) was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use (except distilled alcohol production), the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, in particular for individuals sensitised to salmon. The Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme β‐galactosidase (EC 3.2.1.23) is produced with the non‐genetically modified Aspergillus sp. strain GD‐FAL by Godo Shusei Co., Ltd. The food enzyme is intended to be used in milk processing for the hydrolysis of lactose. The absence of viable cells of the production organism in the food enzyme was not demonstrated. Based on the assumption that all milk/dairy products are enzymatically treated, dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.301 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. The data provided did not allow concerns of genotoxicity of the food enzyme to be excluded. The systemic toxicity could not be assessed in the absence of an appropriate repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study. Consequently, a margin of exposure was not calculated. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood for this to occur is low. Based on the remaining concerns on genotoxicity, the inadequacies of the 90‐day repeated dose oral toxicity study in rats and the missing data regarding the absence of viable cells of the production strain in the food enzyme, the Panel could not conclude on the safety of this food enzyme.

Abstract The food enzyme pectinesterase (pectin pectylhydrolase, EC 3.1.1.11) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus luchuensis strain FLZSC by Advanced Enzyme Technologies Ltd. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme was considered free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in fruit and vegetable processing for the production of juices and other fruit or vegetable products, as well as in the manufacture of alcoholic beverages from fruits other than grapes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.274 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 833 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which, when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 3,040. A search was made for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to those of known allergens and three matches with respiratory allergens were found. The Panel considered that under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure, particularly in individuals sensitised to olive pollen, although unlikely, cannot be excluded. The Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme chymosin (EC 3.4.23.4) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus niger strain DSM 29544 by Chr. Hansen. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme was considered free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in milk processing for cheese production and for production of fermented milk products. Based on the maximum use levels, dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.09 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 84.1 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, results in a margin of exposure above 930. A search for similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and two matches with respiratory allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood for this to occur is considered low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme chymosin (EC 3.4.23.4) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus niger strain DSM 29546 by Chr. Hansen. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in milk processing for cheese production and for the production of fermented milk products. Dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.52 mg total organic solids (TOS)/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 410 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, results in a margin of exposure of at least 790. Similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to those of known allergens was searched and four matches were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure, although unlikely, cannot be excluded, particularly for individuals sensitised to cedar pollen allergens. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme chymosin (EC 3.4.23.4) is produced with the genetically modified Kluyveromyces lactis strain CHY by DSM Food Specialties B.V. It is intended to be used in milk processing for cheese production and for production of fermented milk products. Dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.69 mg total organic solids (TOS)/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. The production strain contains multiple copies of known antimicrobial resistance genes and consequently, it does not fully fulfil the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. However, considering the absence of viable cells and DNA from the production organism in the food enzyme, this is not considered to be a risk. As no other concerns arising from the microbial source and its subsequent genetic modification or from the manufacturing process have been identified, the Panel considered that toxicological tests were not needed for the assessment of this food enzyme. Similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to those of known allergens was searched and four matches were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure, although unlikely, cannot be excluded, particularly for individuals sensitised to cedar pollen allergens. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Abstract The food enzyme chymosin (EC 3.4.23.4) is produced with the genetically modified Aspergillus niger strain by Chr. Hansen. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in milk processing for cheese production and for the production of fermented milk products. Dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.09 mg total organic solids (TOS)/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90‐day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level at the highest dose of 1,000 mg TOS/kg bw per day the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, results in a margin of exposure of at least 10,600. Similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to those of known allergens was searched and two matches with respiratory allergens were found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic sensitisation and elicitation reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood for this to occur is considered low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.