Search

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Carum carvi L. (caraway oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel concluded that the use of caraway oil is of no concern up to the following concentrations in complete feed: 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 24 mg/kg for sows, 35 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 11 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, 10 mg/kg for dairy cows, sheep, goats, horses and rabbits, 25 mg/kg for salmonids and dogs. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For cats, ornamental fish and other species, no conclusion can be drawn. The use of caraway oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. The additive under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a respiratory and skin sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to perillaldehyde may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since C. carvi and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the fruit of Carum carvi L. (caraway oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel concluded that the use of caraway oil is of no concern up to the following concentrations in complete feed: 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 24 mg/kg for sows, 35 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), 11 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, 10 mg/kg for dairy cows, sheep, goats, horses and rabbits, 25 mg/kg for salmonids and dogs. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For cats, ornamental fish and other species, no conclusion can be drawn. The use of caraway oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. The additive under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes, and as a respiratory and skin sensitiser. When handling the essential oil, exposure of unprotected users to perillaldehyde may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. Since C. carvi and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of expressed sweet orange oil and its fractions obtained from the fruit peels of Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck, when used as sensory additives (flavourings) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The presence of perillaldehyde was identified as a source of potential concern. However, in target species fed citrus by-products as part of daily feed, the use of the expressed orange oil and its fractions was not expected to increase the exposure to perillaldehyde to a relevant extent (< 10%). For dogs, cats, ornamental fish and ornamental birds not normally exposed to citrus by-products, no conclusion can be drawn. For the other species, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additives under assessment are safe at the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additives up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The additives under assessment should be considered as irritants to skin and eyes, and as skin and respiratory sensitisers. The use of the additives under the proposed conditions of use in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Expressed orange oil and its fractions were recognised to flavour food. Since their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 the safety and efficacy of expressed sweet orange oil and its fractions obtained from the fruit peels of Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbeck, when used as sensory additives (flavourings) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The presence of perillaldehyde was identified as a source of potential concern. However, in target species fed citrus by‐products as part of daily feed, the use of the expressed orange oil and its fractions was not expected to increase the exposure to perillaldehyde to a relevant extent (< 10%). For dogs, cats, ornamental fish and ornamental birds not normally exposed to citrus by‐products, no conclusion can be drawn. For the other species, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additives under assessment are safe at the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additives up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The additives under assessment should be considered as irritants to skin and eyes, and as skin and respiratory sensitisers. The use of the additives under the proposed conditions of use in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Expressed orange oil and its fractions were recognised to flavour food. Since their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

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 the safety and efficacy of expressed mandarin oil from the fruit peels of Citrus reticulata Blanco, when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for poultry, 33 mg/kg for pigs, 30 mg/kg for ruminants, 40 mg/kg for horse, and 15 mg/kg for salmon and rabbit. The presence of perillaldehyde was identified as a source of potential concern. However, in target species fed citrus by‐products as part of daily feed the use of the expressed mandarin oil in feed was not expected to increase the exposure to perillaldehyde to a relevant extent (< 4%). For companion animals and ornamental fish not normally exposed to citrus by‐products, no conclusion can be drawn. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and as a skin sensitiser. The use of the additive in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Expressed mandarin oil was recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of expressed mandarin oil from the fruit peels of Citrus reticulata Blanco, when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for poultry, 33 mg/kg for pigs, 30 mg/kg for ruminants, 40 mg/kg for horse, and 15 mg/kg for salmon and rabbit. The presence of perillaldehyde was identified as a source of potential concern. However, in target species fed citrus by-products as part of daily feed the use of the expressed mandarin oil in feed was not expected to increase the exposure to perillaldehyde to a relevant extent (< 4%). For companion animals and ornamental fish not normally exposed to citrus by-products, no conclusion can be drawn. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to the maximum proposed use level in feed. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and as a skin sensitiser. The use of the additive in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Expressed mandarin oil was recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State the Netherlands for the pesticide active substance terpenoid blend QRD-460 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of terpenoid blend QRD-460 as an insecticide on tomato, melon, cucumber and pepper. The reliable endpoints concluded as being appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, derived from the available studies and literature in the dossier peer reviewed, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]