Assessment of the application for renewal of authorisation of GalliPro ® (Bacillus subtilis DSM 17299) for chickens for fattening

GalliPro \uae is the trade name for a feed additive based on viable cells of a strain of Bacillus subtilis intended for use as a zootechnical additive (gut flora stabiliser) in feed for chickens for fattening. The product is currently authorised for use in chickens for fattening. This opinion concerns the renewal of this authorisation. Bacillus subtilis is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to establish the safety for the target species, consumers and the environment. The identity of the strain present in the additive was established and evidence was provided on the lack of toxigenic potential as well as acquired antibiotic resistance determinants to antibiotics of human and veterinary importance. Accordingly, this strain is presumed safe for the target species, consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and the environment. Since no concerns are expected from other components of the additive, GalliPro \uae is considered safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel confirms its previous conclusions that GalliPro \uae is safe for the target species; consumers of products from animals fed the additive and the environment. GalliPro \uae should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of GalliPro \uae for skin and eyes irritancy and dermal sensitisation

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Bifidobacterium longum CNCM I-5642 (PP102I) for cats and dogs (Nestlé Enterprises S.A.)

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 Bifidobacterium longum CNCM I-5642 (PP102I) when used as a feed additive for cats and dogs. The product under assessment consists of viable cells of a strain of B. longum, a species considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The strain was unambiguously identified as B. longum and was shown not to harbour antimicrobial resistance determinants for antibiotics of human and veterinary importance, thus meeting the QPS requirements. Following the QPS approach to safety assessment and since no concerns are expected from maltodextrin, the other component of the additive, PP102I was considered safe for the target species and the environment. Owing to the lack of data, no conclusions could be drawn on the skin/eye irritancy potential of PP102I. However, it should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of PP102I for the target species

Safety and efficacy of Bonvital® (Enterococcus faeciumDSM 7134) as a feed additive for laying hens

open23siFollowing a request from the European Commission, EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Bonvital® for laying hens. Bonvital® is an additive containing viable cells of Enterococcus faeciumDSM 7134 marketed in two forms, a granular and a powder form, both with a guaranteed minimum concentration of E. faeciumDSM 7134 of 1.0 × 1010 colony forming units (CFU)/g additive. Bonvital® in either form is intended for use in feed for laying hens at the minimum concentration of 1.0 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed and at the maximum concentration of 1.0 × 1010 CFU/kg feedingstuffs. Bonvital powder® is also proposed for use in water for drinking at the minimum concentration of 5.0 × 108 CFU/L. The use of Bonvital® in animal nutrition is considered safe for the target animals. The results of a tolerance trial in which hens were fed the additive at 10-fold the maximum recommended dose support this conclusion. Delivery of comparable doses of the additive via water for drinking is considered as safe for laying hens. Bonvital® at the proposed conditions of use is safe for consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and for the environment. Bonvital® is not a dermal or ocular irritant but a potential dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Bonvital® has the potential to be efficacious in improving the hen's performance when supplemented at 1.0 × 109 CFU/kg feed or 5.0 × 108 CFU/L water for drinking.openBampidis V.; Azimonti G.; Bastos M.; Christensen H.; Dusemund B.; Kouba M.; Fasmon Durjava M.; Lopez-Alonso M.; Lopez Puente S.; Marcon F.; Mayo B.; Pechova A.; Petkova M.; Ramos F.; Sanz Y.; Villa R.; Woutersen R.; Dierick N.; Martelli G.; Anguita M.; Galobart J.; Revez J.; Brozzi R.Bampidis V.; Azimonti G.; Bastos M.; Christensen H.; Dusemund B.; Kouba M.; Fasmon Durjava M.; Lopez-Alonso M.; Lopez Puente S.; Marcon F.; Mayo B.; Pechova A.; Petkova M.; Ramos F.; Sanz Y.; Villa R.; Woutersen R.; Dierick N.; Martelli G.; Anguita M.; Galobart J.; Revez J.; Brozzi R

Efficacy of the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) CECT 8350 and Limosilactobacillus reuteri (formerly Lactobacillus reuteri) CECT 8700 (AQ02) for suckling piglets (Aquilon Cyl S.L.)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the feed additive consisting of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum (formerly Lactobacillus plantarum) CECT 8350 and Limosilactobacillus reuteri (formerly Lactobacillus reuteri) CECT 8700 (AQ02) as a zootechnical feed additive for suckling piglets. In a previous opinion the FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is considered safe for the target species, the consumer, and the environment. The Panel concluded that the additive should be considered a respiratory sensitiser but could not conclude on the skin/eye irritation potential or on its skin sensitisation potential. The Panel previously could not conclude on the efficacy of AQ02. The applicant has provided supplementary information to support the efficacy of the additive in suckling piglets. Based on the data provided, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of 6-phytase produced by Trichoderma reesei CBS 146250 (Axtra® PHY GOLD 30L, Axtra® PHY GOLD 30T, Axtra® PHY GOLD 65G) for all poultry species and all pigs (Danisco (UK) ltd)

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 6-phytase produced by the genetically modified strain Trichoderma reesei CBS 146250 (Axtra® PHY GOLD 30L, Axtra® PHY GOLD 30 T and Axtra® PHY GOLD 65G) as a zootechnical feed additive for all poultry species and all pigs. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the genetic modification of the production strain does not give rise to safety concerns. Based on the no observed adverse effect level identified in a subchronic oral toxicity study in rats, the additive was considered safe for all poultry species and all pigs at the proposed conditions of use. The Panel also concluded that the use of the product as a feed additive does not give rise to concerns for consumers and the environment. Owing to the lack of data obtained with the final formulations, the Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to eyes or skin. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, it is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The panel concludes that the additive is efficacious in increasing the phosphorus utilisation when supplemented at 500 FTU/kg for all growing poultry species and all pigs, and at 300 FTU/kg in laying hens and other laying birds

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of pancreatin from porcine pancreas (Pan-zoot) for dogs (Almapharm GmbH + Co KG)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a pancreatic extract (Pan-zoot) as a zootechnical additive for dogs. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not conclude on the safety of Pan-Zoot as a feed additive for dogs under the proposed conditions of use. The FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the skin/eye irritancy potential of the additive or on the dermal sensitisation potential. Owing to its proteinaceous nature, the additive is considered a respiratory sensitiser. The additive may induce allergic reactions to the exposed users. The Panel concluded that there is no need for an environmental risk assessment. The FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the product as a feed additive at the recommended conditions of use

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-β-xylanase produced by Bacillus subtilis LMG S-15136 (Belfeed B MP/ML) for sows in order to have benefits in piglets and for all porcine species (Beldem, a division of Puratos NV)

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 Belfeed B MP/ML as a feed additive for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. The additive is to be used in to sows in order to have benefits in piglets and to all porcine species at any developmental stage at 10 IU/kg feed. This additive consists of endo-1,4-β-xylanase produced by a genetically modified strain of Bacillus subtilis (LMG S-15136). In a previous opinion, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety of the additive for the users regarding the potential of the additive as dermal sensitiser and on the efficacy of the additive when added to feed for sows in order to have benefits in piglets. In the absence of new information, the FEEDAP Panel retained its previous conclusion that the additive is not irritant to skin or eyes but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. No conclusions could be drawn on its potential to be a dermal sensitiser. The applicant provided new efficacy data and complementary information regarding a previous study. Based on the previously assessed data and the newly submitted ones, the Panel concludes that although the additive has a potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in sows during the lactation period at the level of 10 IU/kg feed, the data are considered not sufficient to conclude on a beneficial effect on the performance of the litters

Safety of 41 flavouring compounds providing a herbal flavour and belonging to different chemical groups for use as feed additives in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

: Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of 41 compounds to provide a Herbal flavour and belonging to different chemical groups, when used as sensory additives in feed for all animal species. Fourteen out of the 41 compounds were tested in tolerance studies in chickens for fattening, piglets, cattle for fattening and Atlantic salmon. No adverse effects were observed in the tolerance studies at 10-fold the intended level. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the 14 tested compounds were safe for these species at the proposed use level and conclusions were extrapolated to all animal species. For the remaining 27 compounds, read-across from structurally similar compounds tested in tolerance trials and belonging to the same chemical group was applied. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that these 27 compounds were safe for all animal species at the proposed use level. No safety concern would arise for the consumer and the environment from the use of the 41 compounds up to the maximum proposed use level in feed

Safety and efficacy of muramidase from Trichoderma reesei DSM 32338 as a feed additive for turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding, chickens reared for breeding and other poultry species reared for breeding

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 muramidase produced by Trichoderma reesei DSM 32338. The additive is considered safe for turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding, chickens reared for laying/breeding and other poultry species reared for breeding up to the maximum recommended dose of 45,000 LSU(F)/kg feed. The additive is considered safe for the consumer and the environment. No conclusions can be reached on the potential of the additive for skin/eye irritancy and skin sensitisation. The additive should be considered a potential respiratory sensitiser. The additive has the potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in turkeys for fattening, turkeys reared for breeding, chickens reared for laying/breeding and other poultry species reared for breeding when added to feed at 25,000 LSU(F)/kg feed

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-beta-xylanase and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase produced with Talaromyces versatilis IMI 378536 and DSM 26702 (ROVABIO® ADVANCE) for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening (ADISSEO France S.A.S)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of ROVABIO® ADVANCE (liquid and solid) which contains endo-1,4-beta-xylanase and endo-1,3(4)-beta-glucanase. The enzymes present in the additive are produced by two strains of Talaromyces versatilis, one of them genetically modified. The additive is intended to be used as a feed additive for weaned piglets and pigs for fattening. Viable cells of the production strains and DNA of the genetically modified strain were not detected in the fermentation product used to formulate the additive. Based on the results of a tolerance trial in weaned piglets, the FEEDAP Panel concluded that ROVABIO® ADVANCE is safe for weaned piglets under the recommended conditions of use. This conclusion was extended to pigs for fattening. Based on the outcome of the toxicological studies performed, the Panel concluded that the additive is of no concern regarding consumer safety. ROVABIO® ADVANCE is not irritant to the skin or eyes but it is a skin and respiratory sensitiser. No risks to the environment are expected from the use of the additive in animal nutrition. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of ROVABIO® ADVANCE