Efficacy of a preparation of algae interspaced bentonite as a feed additive for all animal species

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the efficacy of a preparation of algae interspaced bentonite when used as aflatoxin B1 (AfB1) binder for all animal species; the additive is composed of bentonite feed grade and algae belonging to Ulva spp. The European Commission request follows an opinion of the FEEDAP Panel published in 2016; in that opinion, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the efficacy of the additive. The applicant has submitted additional information to allow the FEEDAP Panel to complete its assessment; these additional data, related to the efficacy of the additive, are the subject of this opinion. In the efficacy study provided, the use of the additive reduced the AfM1 in milk, although this effect seemed to be not consistent over time; this study presented some weaknesses and limitations (incomplete data analysis, reporting and lack of determination of the active substance of the additive in feed) which do not allow the FEEDAP Panel to draw any conclusion on the efficacy of the additive. Due to insufficient evidence, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the efficacy of the algae interspaced bentonite as a technological feed additive for all animal species

Safety and efficacy of TYFER\u2122 (Ferric tyrosine chelate) as a zootechnical feed additive for chickens, turkeys and minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the product TYFERTM (ferric tyrosine chelate) as zootechnical feed additive for chickens, turkeys and minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. The additive is safe for chickens for fattening at the maximum expected level of 200 mg TYFERTM/kg complete feed; this conclusion can be extended to chickens reared for laying/breeding and extrapolated to turkeys and all minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. No concerns for consumer safety are expected from the use of the additive in poultry nutrition. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) considers that the additive poses a risk to users by inhalation, and should also be considered as an irritant to skin, eyes and mucous membranes. Due to the presence of nickel, ferric tyrosine chelate should also be considered as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. The supplementation of feed with the additive is not expected to pose an environmental risk. TYFERTM used at the minimum recommended level (20 mg/kg feed) in chickens diets has the potential to improve zootechnical parameters of birds. The additive at 20 mg/kg feed has the potential to reduce the caecal load Campylobacter spp. by at least 1 log10-units in chickens for fattening, thus with a potential impact to reduce the risk of human campylobacteriosis; however, the Panel notes that the load of Campylobacter in the chickens caecum is one of the multiple factors that contribute to Campylobacter load in carcases-meat. The conclusions on the efficacy of the additive can be extended to chickens reared for laying/breeding and extrapolated to turkeys and all minor poultry species for fattening or reared for laying/breeding. The Panel recommends including a specification for maximum lithium content in a potential authorisation of the additive

Safety and efficacy of dry grape extract when used as flavouring in water for drinking for all animal species and categories

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 dry grape extract when added to water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The additive under assessment (dry grape extract) is a mixture of two extracts from the seeds and skin of Vitis vinifera subsp. vinifera. The FEEDAP Panel has previously issued an opinion on the safety and efficacy of this dry grape extract when added to feed. It was concluded that the additive is safe at the maximum proposed use level (100 mg/kg complete feed) for all animal species except dogs, for which no safe dietary concentration could be established. The FEEDAP Panel also concluded that there were no concerns for consumer safety and that no risks for the environment were to be expected and could not conclude on the safety for the user. Since consumer, user and environmental safety are independent of the mode of delivery of the additive, the conclusions reached in the previous opinion also apply to use in water. For a number of target species, the established safe concentration in feed could be exceeded if a maximum proposed dose in water (100 mg/L) was applied. Considering the margin of safety identified in the previous assessment, a maximum concentration of 50 mg/L water for drinking is considered safe for all animal species except dogs. Since the major component of the additive, the proanthocyanidin-rich seed extract, is recognised to provide flavour in food and its function in water for drinking for animals would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy is considered necessary

Geographical and temporal distribution of SARS-CoV-2 clades in the WHO European Region, January to June 2020

We show the distribution of SARS-CoV-2 genetic clades over time and between countries and outline potential genomic surveillance objectives. We applied three available genomic nomenclature systems for SARS-CoV-2 to all sequence data from the WHO European Region available during the COVID-19 pandemic until 10 July 2020. We highlight the importance of real-time sequencing and data dissemination in a pandemic situation. We provide a comparison of the nomenclatures and lay a foundation for future European genomic surveillance of SARS-CoV-2.Peer reviewe

The evolving SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in Africa: Insights from rapidly expanding genomic surveillance

INTRODUCTION Investment in Africa over the past year with regard to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) sequencing has led to a massive increase in the number of sequences, which, to date, exceeds 100,000 sequences generated to track the pandemic on the continent. These sequences have profoundly affected how public health officials in Africa have navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. RATIONALE We demonstrate how the first 100,000 SARS-CoV-2 sequences from Africa have helped monitor the epidemic on the continent, how genomic surveillance expanded over the course of the pandemic, and how we adapted our sequencing methods to deal with an evolving virus. Finally, we also examine how viral lineages have spread across the continent in a phylogeographic framework to gain insights into the underlying temporal and spatial transmission dynamics for several variants of concern (VOCs). RESULTS Our results indicate that the number of countries in Africa that can sequence the virus within their own borders is growing and that this is coupled with a shorter turnaround time from the time of sampling to sequence submission. Ongoing evolution necessitated the continual updating of primer sets, and, as a result, eight primer sets were designed in tandem with viral evolution and used to ensure effective sequencing of the virus. The pandemic unfolded through multiple waves of infection that were each driven by distinct genetic lineages, with B.1-like ancestral strains associated with the first pandemic wave of infections in 2020. Successive waves on the continent were fueled by different VOCs, with Alpha and Beta cocirculating in distinct spatial patterns during the second wave and Delta and Omicron affecting the whole continent during the third and fourth waves, respectively. Phylogeographic reconstruction points toward distinct differences in viral importation and exportation patterns associated with the Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants and subvariants, when considering both Africa versus the rest of the world and viral dissemination within the continent. Our epidemiological and phylogenetic inferences therefore underscore the heterogeneous nature of the pandemic on the continent and highlight key insights and challenges, for instance, recognizing the limitations of low testing proportions. We also highlight the early warning capacity that genomic surveillance in Africa has had for the rest of the world with the detection of new lineages and variants, the most recent being the characterization of various Omicron subvariants. CONCLUSION Sustained investment for diagnostics and genomic surveillance in Africa is needed as the virus continues to evolve. This is important not only to help combat SARS-CoV-2 on the continent but also because it can be used as a platform to help address the many emerging and reemerging infectious disease threats in Africa. In particular, capacity building for local sequencing within countries or within the continent should be prioritized because this is generally associated with shorter turnaround times, providing the most benefit to local public health authorities tasked with pandemic response and mitigation and allowing for the fastest reaction to localized outbreaks. These investments are crucial for pandemic preparedness and response and will serve the health of the continent well into the 21st century