Qualified Presumption Of Safety Approach Research Articles

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme α-amylase from the non-genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain AE-TA.

The food enzyme α-amylase (4-α-d-glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) is produced with the non-genetically modified microorganism Bacillus licheniformis strain AE-TA by Amano Enzyme Inc. The food enzyme is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) are removed in two food manufacturing processes, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining six processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.056 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. The production strain of the food enzyme fulfils the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. Consequently, in the absence of other concerns, the Panel considered that toxicological studies were not needed for the safety assessment of this food enzyme. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and two matches with respiratory allergens were found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded (except for the production of distilled alcohol), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiaeDSM 34246 (Canobios-BL) for cats and dogs (ACEL pharma s.r.l.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DSM 34246 as a zootechnical feed additive for dogs and cats. The additive, with the trade name Canobios-BL, is intended for use in feed for cats and dogs at a proposed minimum inclusion level of 5 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. Since the identity of the active agent has been clearly established and the additive is composed by dried cells of the active agent and an emulsifier, that are not expected to introduce any risk, the additive is considered safe for the target species. Canobios-BL is not a skin or eye irritant but should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Canobios-BL is considered to be efficacious in feedingstuffs for dogs and cats at the use level 5 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed.

Safety evaluation of a food enzyme containing bacillolysin and subtilisin activities from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AR-383.

The food enzyme with two declared activities, bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) and subtilisin (EC 3.4.21.62), is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AR-383 by AB Enzymes GmbH. The food enzyme is intended to be used in nine food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed in the production of distilled alcohol, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining eight food manufacturing processes. Exposure was estimated to be up to 1.958 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment and no issues of concern arising from the production process of the food enzyme were identified, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made, and 30 matches were found, including one food allergen (melon). The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded, but for individuals sensitised to melon, this would not exceed the risk of consuming melon. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme bacillolysin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AE-NP.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AE-NP by Amano Enzyme Inc. The production strain meets the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The food enzyme is intended to be used in 14 food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed in three manufacturing processes, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining 11 food manufacturing processes in which the food enzyme-TOS is retained. It was estimated to be up to 35.251 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach and no issue of concern arising from the production process of the food enzyme were identified, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme subtilisin from the genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM-CB.

The food enzyme subtilisin (EC 3.4.21.62) is produced with the genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM-CB by Novozymes A/S. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is considered free from viable cells of the production organism and its DNA. It is intended to be used in six food manufacturing processes. The dietary exposure to the food enzyme-TOS was estimated to be up to 0.722 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. The production strain of the food enzyme fulfils the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. As no other concerns arising from the manufacturing process were identified, the Panel considered that toxicological tests were not required for the assessment of this food enzyme. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and 20 matches were found, including two food allergens (melon and pomegranate). The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, particularly in individuals sensitised to melon and pomegranate, but would not exceed the risk from consumption of melon or pomegranate. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme bacillolysin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain NZYM-NB.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain NZYM-NB by Novozymes A/S. The production strain meets the requirements for qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The food enzyme is intended to be used in eleven food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during two processes, dietary exposure was estimated only for the remaining nine food manufacturing processes. Exposure was estimated to be up to 1.327 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach and no issue of concern arising from the production process of the food enzyme was identified, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded (except for distilled alcohol production), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme bacillolysin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain DP-Cyb74.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain DP-Cyb74 by Genencor International B.V. The production strain met all requirements for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The food enzyme is intended to be used in six food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 1.536 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach and no issue of concern arose from the production process of the food enzyme, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme β-fructofuranosidase from the non-genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain NCYC R693.

The food enzyme β-fructofuranosidase (β-d-fructofuranoside fructohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.26) is produced with the non-genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain NCYC R693 by Kerry Ingredients & Flavours Ltd. The production strain meets the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The food enzyme is intended to be used in four food manufacturing processes. The dietary exposure to the food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 2.485 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach of safety assessment and no issue of concern arising from the production process of the food enzyme were identified, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and one match with a tomato allergen was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals sensitised to tomato, cannot be excluded. However, the likelihood of allergic reactions is expected not to exceed the likelihood of allergic reactions to tomato. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Update of the list of qualified presumption of safety (QPS) recommended microbiological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 19: Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2023.

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) process was developed to provide a safety assessment approach for microorganisms intended for use in food or feed chains. The QPS approach is based on an assessment of published data for each taxonomic unit (TU), with respect to its taxonomic identity, the body of relevant knowledge and safety concerns. Safety concerns identified for a TU are, where possible, confirmed at the species/strain or product level and reflected by 'qualifications'. In the period covered by this Statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS TUs. Of 71 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2023 (30 as feed additives, 22 as food enzymes or additives, 7 as novel foods and 12 from plant protection products [PPP]), 61 were not evaluated because: 26 were filamentous fungi, 1 was Enterococcus faecium, 5 were Escherichia coli, 1 was a bacteriophage (all excluded from the QPS evaluation) and 28 were TUs that already have a QPS status. The other 10 notifications belonged to 9 TUs which were evaluated for a possible QPS status: Ensifer adhaerens and Heyndrickxia faecalis did not get the QPS recommendation due to the limited body of knowledge about their occurrence in the food and/or feed chains and Burkholderia ubonensis also due to its ability to generate biologically active compounds with antimicrobial activity; Klebsiella pneumoniae, Serratia marcescens and Pseudomonas putida due to safety concerns. K. pneumoniae is excluded from future QPS evaluations. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'for production purposes only'; Clostridium tyrobutyricum is recommended for QPS status with the qualification 'absence of genetic determinants for toxigenic activity'; Candida oleophila has been added as a synonym of Yarrowia lipolytica. The Panel clarifies the extension of the QPS status for genetically modified strains.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme bacillolysin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AGS 430.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AGS 430 by Kerry Ingredients & Flavours Ltd. The production strain qualifies for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The food enzyme is intended to be used in 11 food manufacturing processes: processing of cereals and other grains for the production of baked products; cereal-based products other than baked; brewed products; starch and gluten fractions; distilled alcohol; processing of dairy products for the production of flavouring preparations and modified milk proteins; processing of meat and fish products for the production of protein hydrolysates; processing of plant- and fungal-derived products for the production of protein hydrolysates and plant-based analogues of milk and milk products; processing of yeast and yeast products. Since residual amounts of the total organic solids (TOS) are removed during two processes, dietary exposure was estimated only for the remaining nine food manufacturing processes. Exposure was estimated up to 3.482 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach and no issue of concern arose from the production process of the food enzyme, the Panel considered that no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were necessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure cannot be excluded (except for distilled alcohol production), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme subtilisin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM-CX.

The food enzyme subtilisin (EC 3.4.21.62) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain NZYM-CX by Novozymes A/S. The production strain met the requirements for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The food enzyme is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes: processing of cereals and other grains for the production of brewed products; processing of dairy products for the production of modified milk proteins and flavouring preparations; processing of plant- and fungal-derived products for the production of plant-based analogues of milk and milk products, protein hydrolysates and edible oils from algae; processing of meat and fish products for the production of protein hydrolysates; processing of yeast and yeast products. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed in the production of edible oils from algae, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining seven food manufacturing processes. Exposure was estimated to be up to 2.393 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. As the production strain qualified for the QPS approach and no issues of concern arose from the production process of the food enzyme, the Panel considered that toxicological studies were unnecessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was performed, and a total of 20 matches were found, 17 to respiratory allergens, two to food allergens (found in muskmelon and pomegranate) and one to a contact allergen. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded, especially in individuals sensitised to muskmelon or pomegranate, but would not exceed the risk of consuming these foods. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme bacillolysin from the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain GNP.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain GNP by DSM Food Specialties B.V. The production strain qualifies for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The food enzyme is intended to be used in nine food manufacturing processes: processing of cereals and other grains for the production of baked products, cereal-based products other than baked, brewed products and distilled alcohol; processing of dairy products for the production of flavouring preparation and modified milk proteins; processing of meat and fish products for the production of protein hydrolysates; processing of plant- and fungal-derived products for the production of protein hydrolysates and plant-based analogues of milk and milk products. Since the food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) is not carried into distilled alcohols, dietary exposure was estimated only to the remaining eight food processes. Exposure was estimated to be up to 17.934 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. As the production strain qualifies for the QPS approach to safety assessment and no issue of concern arose from the production process, no toxicological studies other than the assessment of allergenicity were required. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure cannot be excluded (except for distilled alcohol production), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme glucose oxidase from the genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain LALL-GO.

The food enzyme glucose oxidase (β-d-glucose:oxygen 1-oxidoreductase; EC 1.1.3.4) is produced with the genetically modified Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain LALL-GO by Lallemand Inc. The genetic modifications do not give rise to safety concerns. The food enzyme is free from viable cells of the production organism, but not from recombinant DNA. It is intended to be used in baking processes. Dietary exposure was estimated to be up to 0.233 mg total organic solids/kg body weight per day in European populations. Since the production strain meets the requirements for the Qualified Presumption of Safety approach and no issues of concern arising from the production process of the food enzyme were identified, the Panelconsidered that no toxicological studies were necessary. Asearch for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and two matches were found. The Panelconsidered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded. The glucose oxidase under assessment shows sequence homology with an allergen from almond, which is listed in the Annex II of the Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011. Other than potential allergic reactions, the Panelconcluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety evaluation of the food enzyme α-amylase from the non-genetically modified Bacillus licheniformis strain T74.

The food enzyme α-amylase (4-α-D-glucan glucanohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.1) is produced with the non-genetically modified microorganism Bacillus licheniformis strain T74 by Novozymes A/S. The production strain met the qualifications of the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The food enzyme is intended to be used in eight food manufacturing processes: starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and other starch hydrolysates, distilled alcohol production, refined and unrefined sugar production, brewing processes, cereal-based processes, fruit and vegetable processing for juice production, fruit and vegetable processing for products other than juices and the production of dairy analogues. Since residual amounts of total organic solids (TOS) are removed during two food processes (starch processing for the production of glucose syrups and other starch hydrolysates, distilled alcohol production), dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining six food manufacturing processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.291 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. Since the production strain meets the requirements for the QPS approach and no issues of concern arose from the production process of the food enzyme, the Panel considered that toxicological studies were unnecessary. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that, under the intended conditions of use, the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme cannot be excluded (except for distilled alcohol production), but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I‐3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I‐3699 for weaned piglets (STI Biotechnologie)

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 Sorbiflore® ADVANCE, a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I-3699 intended to be used as a zootechnical additive (functional group: other zootechnical additives) in feed for weaned piglets to improve their performance. In a previous opinion, the additive was described as containing viable but not cultivable cells of the two strains in a 1:1 ratio, with a minimum of total lactic acid bacteria counts of 5× 108 viable-forming units (VFU)/g additive. However, in that opinion, the Panel could not fully characterise the additive or conclude on its dermal/ocular irritancy or sensitisation potential. In the current assessment, the applicant provided supplementary information to address the missing information for the characterisation of the additive. The proposed methodology to discriminate and individually quantify the two strains composing the additive still presented limitations. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the data available do not allow to fully characterise the additive. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the taxonomical identification of the strain CNCM I-3699, and consequently, on its eligibility for the application of the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. Therefore, the previous conclusions on the safety of the additive based on the QPS approach could not be confirmed. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species, consumer and the environment. Sorbiflore® ADVANCE is not irritant to skin. The Panel could not conclude on the eye irritancy or skin sensitisation potential of the additive.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DBVPG 48 SF (BioCell®) for horses, pigs and ruminants (Mazzoleni S.p.A.)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Saccharomyces cerevisiae DBVPG 48 SF (BioCell®) as a zootechnical feed additive for horses, pigs and ruminants. The product, manufactured in three formulations (microsphere, micropellet and powder), is intended for use in complete feed at a minimum inclusion level of 3 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed for horses, 4 × 108 CFU/kg complete feed for dairy cows and minor dairy species, 4 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed for calves, cattle for fattening, minor growing and fattening ruminants, piglets and pigs for fattening and minor porcine species and 6 × 109 CFU/kg complete feed for sows and minor porcine species for reproduction. Saccharomyces cerevisiae is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. The identity of the strain was conclusively established and, therefore, the use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for the target species, the consumer and the environment. The additive, in any formulation, is not irritant to the eyes and skin but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. The Panel cannot conclude on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. The Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious at the proposed conditions of use for horses, dairy ruminants and all pigs. However, the Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of the additive for calves, and neither for cattle for fattening, minor growing and fattening ruminants.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosusCNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I-3699 for all animal species (STI Biotechnologie).

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panelon Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety andefficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I-3699 intended to be used as a technological additive (functional group: silage additives) in forage for all species. In a previous opinion, the additive was described as containing viable but not cultivable cells of the two strains in a 1:1 ratio, with a minimum of total lactic acid bacteria counts of 5× 108 Viable Forming Units (VFU)/g additive. However, in that opinion the Panelcould not fully characterise the additive or conclude on its dermal/ocular irritancy or sensitisation potential. In the current assessment, the applicant provided supplementary information to address these gaps. The proposed methodology to discriminate and individually quantify the two strains composing the additive still presented limitations. Therefore, the Panelconcluded that the data available do not allow to fully characterise the additive. The Panelwas not in the position to conclude on the taxonomical identification of the strain CNCM I-3699, and consequently, on its eligibility for the application of the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. Therefore, the previous conclusions on the safety of the additive based on the QPS approach could not be confirmed. The Panelwas not in the position to conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species, consumer and the environment. The additive is not irritant to skin. The Panelcould not conclude on the eye irritancy or skin sensitisation potential of the additive. The Panelreiterated its previous conclusions that no conclusions can be drawn on the efficacy of the additive to improve the ensiling process of forage.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I-3699 for chickens for fattening (STI Biotechnologie).

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 Sorbiflore® ADVANCE, a feed additive consisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp.CNCM I-3699 intended to be used as a zootechnical additive (functional group: other zootechnical additives) in feed for chickens for fattening to improve their performance. In a previous opinion, the additive was described as containing viable but not cultivable cells of the two strains in a 1:1 ratio, with a minimum of total lactic acid bacteria counts of 5× 108 viable forming units (VFU)/g additive. However, in that opinion, the Panel could not fully characterise the additive or conclude on its dermal/ocular irritancy or sensitisation potential. In the current assessment, the applicant provided supplementary information to address the missing information for the characterisation of the additive. The proposed methodology to discriminate and individually quantify the two strains composing the additive still presented limitations. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the data available do not allow to fully characterise the additive. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the taxonomical identification of the strain CNCM I-3699, and consequently, on its eligibility for the application of the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. Therefore, the previous conclusions on the safety of the additive based on the QPS approach could not be confirmed. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species, consumer and the environment. Sorbiflore® ADVANCE is not irritant to skin. The Panel could not conclude on the eye irritancy or skin sensitisation potential of the additive.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Bacillus paralicheniformisDSM 5749 and Bacillus subtilisDSM 5750 (BioPlus® 2B) for piglets, calves for fattening and other growing ruminants (Chr. Hansen A/S).

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 a feed additive consisting of two bacilli strains (tradename: BioPlus® 2B) when used in suckling piglets, calves for fattening and other growing ruminants. BioPlus® 2B is composed of viable cells of Bacillus subtilis DSM 5750 and Bacillus licheniformis DSM 5749. In the course of the current assessment, the latest strain was reclassified as Bacillus paralicheniformis. BioPlus® 2B is intended for use in feedingstuffs and water for drinking for the target species at the minimum inclusion level of 1.3× 109CFU/kg feed and 6.4× 108CFU/l water, respectively. B. paralicheniformis and B. subtilis are considered eligible for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach. The identity of the active agents was established, and the qualifications regarding the lack of acquired antimicrobial resistance genes, toxigenic potential and bacitracin production ability were complied with. Following the QPS approach, B. paralicheniformis DSM 5749 and B. subtilis DSM 5750 are presumed safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. Since no concerns are expected from the other components of the additive, BioPlus® 2B was also considered safe for the target species, consumers and the environment. BioPlus® 2B is not irritant to the eyes or skin but should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. The Panel could not conclude on the skin sensitisation potential of the additive. BioPlus® 2B when supplemented at 1.3× 109CFU/kg complete feed and 6.4× 108CFU/l water for drinking has the potential to be efficacious in suckling piglets, calves for fattening and other growing ruminants (e.g. sheep, goat, buffalo) at the same developmental stage.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lentilactobacillus diolivorans (formerly Lactobacillus diolivorans) DSM 33625 as a silage additive for all animal species (Lactosan GmbH & Co.KG).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on Lentilactobacillus diolivorans (formerly Lactobacillus diolivorans) DSM 33625 when used as a technological additive to improve ensiling of forage. The additive is intended for use with all forages and for all animal species at a proposed minimum concentration of 1× 108 colony forming units (CFU)/kg forage. The bacterial species L. diolivorans is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. As the identity of the strain has been clearly established and no acquired antimicrobial resistance determinants of concern were detected, the use of the strain as a silage additive is considered safe for livestock species, for consumers of products from animals fed the treated silage and for the environment. The additive is not a skin or an eye irritant. In the absence of data, no conclusion can be drawn on the skin sensitisation of the additive. Given the proteinaceous nature of the active agent, the additive should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that Lentilactobacillus diolivorans DSM 33625 at a minimum concentration of 1× 108CFU/kg forage may extend the aerobic stability of silage prepared from easy and moderately difficult to ensile forage material with a DM range of 32-65%.