　　 食品伙伴网讯2023�?�?3日，�?a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_1377.html' class='zdbq' title='欧盟食品安全局相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>欧盟食品安全局＇�a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_10.html' class='zdbq' title='EFSA相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>EFSA）消息，应欧盟委员会要求，欧盞�a href='//www.sqrdapp.com/news/tag_4566.html' class='zdbq' title='动物相关食品资讯' target='_blank'>动物饲料添加剁�/a>和产品（FEEDAP）研究小组就由鼠李糖乳杆菋�/a>CNCM I-3698和伴乳杆菌CNCM I-3699组成的饲料添加剂对所有动物的安全性和有效性发表科学意见、�/div>

　　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 co nsisting of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3698 and Companilactobacillus sp. CNCM I-3699 intended to be used as a technological additive (functio nal group: silage additives) in forage for all species. In a previous opinion, the additive was described as co ntaining 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 �� 10 ⁸Viable Forming Units (VFU)/g additive. However, in that opinion the Panel could not fully characterise the additive or co nclude 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 Panel co ncluded that the data available do not allow to fully characterise the additive. The Panel was not in the position to co nclude on the taxo nomical 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 co nclusions on the safety of the additive ba sed on the QPS approach could not be /con firm/ied. The Panel was not in the position to co nclude on the safety of the additive for the target species, co nsumer and the environment. The additive is not irritant to skin. The Panel could not co nclude on the eye irritancy or skin sensitisation potential of the additive. The Panel reiterated its previous co nclusions that no co nclusions can be drawn on the efficacy of the additive to improve the ensiling process of forage.

　　本文由食品伙伴网食品资讯中心编辑，有任何疑问，请联系news@www.sqrdapp.com、�/span>

相关政策解读