Search

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 monosodium l‐glutamate monohydrate produced by fermentation using Corynebacterium glutamicum KCCM 80187 when used as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The production strain is genetically modified and viable cells of the production strain, and its DNA were not detected in the final additive. The additive does not give rise to any safety concern regarding the production strain. Monosodium l‐glutamate monohydrate produced using C. glutamicum KCCM 80187 is considered safe for the target species, for the consumer and for the environment. Moreover, it is considered not toxic by inhalation, not irritant to skin or eyes and not a dermal sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel expressed reservations on the use of the additive in water for drinking due to concerns on its impact on the hygienic conditions of the water. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious to contribute to the flavour of feed.

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.

The additive under assessment is a dried aqueous ethanol extract of Melissa officinalis L. leaves, intended to be used as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed for all animal species. The aqueous ethanol extract is specified to contain ≥ 10% of hydroxycinnamic acid derivatives including ≥ 3% of rosmarinic acid. In a previous assessment, considering the contradictory data from the Ames tests and uncertainty about the qualitative and quantitative presence of flavonoids and other compounds in the extract from M. officinalis L. leaves, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not conclude on the safety of the additive at the proposed use levels of up to 100 mg/kg complete feed for the target species, the consumer and the user. The new data submitted identified luteolin 3′‐glucuronide as the only flavonoid present in the additive, improved the characterisation of the hydroxycinnamates present and demonstrated that the additive is not genotoxic. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additive under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use level of 100 mg/kg complete feed for all animal species. 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 safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of the additive up to the highest safe level in animal nutrition. The exposure of users to dusts from the additive is not of concern. No data are provided on irritant properties for eyes or skin, thus no conclusion can be drawn on these aspects. Due to the nature of the additive, it may be assumed to be potentially both a skin and respiratory sensitiser.

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 a dried flavonoid‐rich extract of Citrus × aurantium L. fruit (bitter orange extract), when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The use of the additive in feed was not expected to increase the exposure to furocoumarins of those target species that are already fed citrus by‐products to a relevant extent (< 5%). For dog, cat and ornamental fish, not normally exposed to citrus by‐products, no conclusion could be drawn. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use level of 400 mg/kg for veal calf (milk replacer), sheep, goat, horse and salmon. For the other species, the calculated maximum safe concentration in complete feed is 102 mg/kg for chicken for fattening, 151 mg/kg for laying hen, 136 mg/kg for turkey for fattening, 182 mg/kg for piglet, 217 mg/kg for pig for fattening, 268 mg/kg for sow, 259 mg/kg for dairy cow and 161 mg/kg for rabbit. 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, except dog, cat and ornamental fish. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to highest safe level in feed for the target animals. The extract under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin, eyes and the respiratory tract, and as a skin sensitiser. Since the additive contains 5‐methoxypsoralen, it may cause phototoxicity. The use of the extract in animal feed under the proposed conditions was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Bitter orange extract 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, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of disodium 5’‐guanylate produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium stationis KCCM 10530 and Escherichia coli K‐12 KFCC 11067 when used as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The additive does not raise safety concerns under the proposed conditions of use for the target species, consumers the users and the environment. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) expressed reservations on the use of the additive in water for drinking due to concerns on its impact on hygienic conditions of the water. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious to contribute to the flavour of feed.

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 an essential oil from the leaves of Citrus x aurantium L. (petitgrain bigarade oil), 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 level of 125 mg/kg complete feed for ornamental fish. For the other species, the calculated safe concentrations in complete feed are 10 mg/kg for chicken for fattening, 14 mg/kg for laying hen, 13 mg/kg for turkey for fattening, 17 mg/kg for piglet, 20 mg/kg for pig for fattening, 25 mg/kg for lactating sow, 43 mg/kg for veal calf (milk replacer), 38 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep, goat and horse, 24 mg/kg for dairy cow, 15 mg/kg for rabbit, 42 mg/kg for salmon, 44 mg/kg for dog and 8 mg/kg for cat. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use level 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. Simultaneous use in feed and water for drinking may lead to the maximum safe dose being exceeded. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to the highest safe 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 was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Petitgrain bigarade 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 lemon oil and distilled lemon oil from Citrus limon (L.) Osbeck and lime oil from Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm.) Swingle, when used as sensory additives in feed for all animal species. The use of the expressed lemon oil and its residual fraction and the use of lime oil in feed is not expected to increase the exposure to furocoumarins and methoxycoumarins and perillaldehyde of those target species that are already fed citrus by‐products a relevant extent (< 10%). For companion animals and ornamental fish not normally exposed to citrus by‐products, no conclusion can be drawn. For the other species and for the distilled fraction of expressed lemon oil, the FEEDAP Panel concludes that the additives under assessment are safe at the maximum proposed or at reduced use levels in complete feed. The Panel considers 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 at the maximum proposed use level in feed. The additives under assessment should be considered as irritants to skin and eyes and the respiratory tract and as skin sensitisers. Since expressed lemon oil and its fractions contain furocoumarins, they may cause phototoxicity. The use of the additives under the proposed conditions of use in animal feed is not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since C. limon and C. aurantiifolia and their preparations are recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy is 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 a tincture from the roots of Gentiana lutea L. (gentian tincture) when used as a sensory feed additive for all animal species. The product is a ■■■■■ solution, with a dry matter content of approximately 4.3%. The product contains on average 0.0836% polyphenols (of which 0.0463% are flavonoids and 0.0027% xanthones) and 0.0022% gentiopicroside. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that gentian tincture is safe at the maximum proposed use level of 50 mg/kg complete feed for short‐living animals (animals for fattening). The FEEDAP Panel considers 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. Considering the genotoxic potential of gentiopicroside and xanthones (gentisin and isogentisin), no conclusions can be drawn for long‐living animals (companion animals, horses and animals for reproduction). No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of gentian tincture up to the highest safe level in animal nutrition. In the absence of data, no conclusions can be drawn on the potential of the tincture to be a dermal/eye irritant or a skin sensitiser. The data available do not allow to conclude on risks of genotoxicity and carcinogenicity for dermal exposure. Use of the tincture derived from G. lutea as a flavour in animal feed is not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since G. lutea and gentian root extract are recognised to flavour food and their function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy is considered necessary for the tincture under application.

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 monosodium l‐glutamate monohydrate produced by fermentation using Corynebacterium glutamicum KCCM 80188 when used as a sensory additive (flavouring compound) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The production strain is not genetically modified. Viable cells of the production strain were not detected in the final additive. The additive does not give rise to any safety concern regarding the production strain. Monosodium l‐glutamate monohydrate produced using C. glutamicum KCCM 80188 is considered safe for the target species, for the consumer and for the environment. Monosodium l‐glutamate monohydrated produced by C. glutamicum KCCM 80188 is considered not toxic by inhalation, not irritant to skin or eyes and not a dermal sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel expressed reservations on the use of the additive in water for drinking due to concerns on its impact on the hygienic conditions of the water. The Panel concluded that the additive is efficacious to contribute to the flavour of feed.