Search

The specific concentrations of flumequine and oxolinic acid in non-target feed for food-producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC, it was not possible to conclude the assessment until further experimental data are available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. No suitable data for the assessment were available. It was recommended to carry out studies to generate the data that are required to fill the gaps which prevented the calculation of the FARSC for these antimicrobials. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Bactocell® is the trade name for a feed additive based on viable cells of a strain of Pediococcus acidilactici. 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 Bactocell® in the context of the renewal of the authorisation for shrimps, salmonids and fish other than salmonids. In addition, the applicant requested the extension of use for all crustaceans. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel concludes that Bactocell® Aqua 10 Md/100 Md is safe under the current conditions of authorisation for the target species (all fish, shrimps and all crustaceans), consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment. Bactocell® Aqua 10 Md/100 Md is non‐irritant to skin and eyes and is not a dermal sensitiser, but should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser. Exposure of users by inhalation is very likely. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of Bactocell® in the context of the renewal of the authorisation. The Panel concludes that the additive at the minimum inclusion level of 1 × 109 CFU/kg feed has the potential to be efficacious in salmonids and in the new species proposed, i.e. all crustaceans.

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 l‐threonine produced by fermentation with Corynebacterium glutamicum ■■■■■ when used as a nutritional additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The product under assessment is l‐threonine produced by fermentation with a ■■■■■ strain of C. glutamicum (■■■■■). l‐Threonine produced by C. glutamicum ■■■■■ is considered safe for the target species when supplemented in appropriate amounts to the diet. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns on the safety of the simultaneous oral administration of l‐threonine via water for drinking and feed. l‐Threonine produced using C. glutamicum ■■■■■ is safe for the consumer. The additive is not a skin or eye irritant and is not a skin sensitiser. Although the workers can be exposed by inhalation, the results of an acute inhalation study showed that risk of adverse effects by inhalation is low. l‐Threonine produced using C. glutamicum ■■■■■ is safe for the environment. The product under assessment is considered an efficacious source of the amino acid l‐threonine for all animal species. For l‐threonine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non‐ruminant species, it requires protection against degradation in the rumen.

The European Commission asked EFSA for an opinion on the safety for the target animals, consumer, user and the environment and on the efficacy of a riboflavin‐based additive (minimum 80%) produced by a genetically modified strain of Ashbya gossypii (■■■■■). It is intended to be used in feed for all animal species and categories. The additive under assessment does not give rise to safety concerns on the genetic modification of the production strain. The additive contains 80% of riboflavin (vitamin B2) and 20% of spent growth medium. The additive is safe for target animals with a wide margin of safety. The use of riboflavin 80% produced by A. gossypii ■■■■■ in animal nutrition does not represent a safety concern for consumers. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) cannot draw a final conclusion on the risk posed for the user by inhalation of riboflavin produced by A. gossypii ■■■■■ and on the potential to be irritant to skin or eyes. The product under assessment is not a skin sensitiser; however, riboflavin is a known photosensitiser. The use of riboflavin produced by A. gossypii ■■■■■ in animal nutrition does not pose a risk to the environment. The additive is regarded as an effective source of riboflavin in covering the animal's requirement when administered via feed. The FEEDAP Panel made recommendations on the description of the additive.