Safety and efficacy of saturated and unsaturated aliphatic secondary alcohols, ketones and esters with esters containing secondary alcohols belonging to chemical group 5 when used as flavourings for all animal species

Aquilina, Gabriele; Bampidis, Vasileios; Bastos, Maria de Lourdes; Bories, Georges; Chesson, Andrew; Cocconcelli, Pier Sandro; Flachowsky, Gerhard; Gropp, Jürgen; Kolar, Boris; Kouba, Maryline; Puente, Secundino López; López‐Alonso, Marta; Mantovani, Alberto; Mayo, Baltasar; Ramos, Fernando; Rychen, Guido; Saarela, Maria; Villa, Roberto Edoardo; Wallace, Robert John; Wester, Pieter

doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4268

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The additives under assessment are 27 compounds belonging to several chemical groups, namely CG 1, 3, 5, 9, 14, 21, 23 and 26, intended for use as sensory additives (functional group: flavouring compounds) in feed for all animal species. 10 In previous opinions of the FEEDAP Panel (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2012a,b,c, 2013, 2015, 2016a,b, 2020a, the 27 additives under assessment were fully characterised and evaluated for their safety and efficacy as flavouring substances. For all compounds, the FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the safety for target animals at the maximum use level proposed by the applicant.…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Safety of 27 flavouring compounds providing a milky‐vanilla flavour and belonging to different chemical groups for use as feed additives in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Bampidis¹,

Azimonti²,

Bastos³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of 27 compounds to provide a milky‐vanilla flavour belonging to different chemical groups, when used as sensory additives in feed for all animal species. Fifteen of the 27 compounds were tested in tolerance studies in chickens for fattening, piglets and cattle for fattening. 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 15 tested compounds were safe for these species at the proposed use level and conclusions were extrapolated to all animal species. For the remaining 12 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 12 compounds were safe for all animal species at the proposed use level. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of the 27 compounds up to the highest levels considered safe for target animals. No new data were submitted on the safety for the user that would allow the FEEDAP Panel to change its previous conclusion for 5‐methylhept‐2‐en‐4‐one [07.139], 5‐methylfurfural [13.001] and 4‐phenylbut‐3‐en‐2‐one [07.024]. The concentrations considered safe for the target species are unlikely to have detrimental effects on the environment for all the compounds.

show abstract

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This application covers 27 compounds under assessment, belonging to several chemical groups (CGs), namely CG 1, 3, 5, 9, 14, 21, 23 and 26, when used as feed flavourings for all animal species which were assessed by the FEEDAP Panel (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2012a , b , c , 2013 , 2015 , 2016a , b , 2020a , b ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety of 27 flavouring compounds providing a milky‐vanilla flavour and belonging to different chemical groups for use as feed additives in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Bampidis¹,

Azimonti²,

Bastos³

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Toxicological data of subchronic studies, from which NOAELs could be derived, were available for 6‐methylhept‐5‐en‐2‐one [07.015] in CG 5 (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2015a , 2021a ), 1,8‐cineole in CG 16 (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2012a , reviewed in EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2021b ), and for the representative compounds for subassessment groups of CG 31, myrcene [01.008], limonene [01.045], 1‐isopropyl‐4‐benzene [01.002] and β‐caryophyllene [01.007] (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2015b , 2016b ).…”

Section: Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil from Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl (camphor white oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Bampidis¹,

Azimonti²,

Bastos³

et al. 2022

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 an essential oil from the whole plant Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl (camphor white oil), when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 30 mg/kg for piglets, pigs for fattening, sows, horses, rabbits, fish, ornamental fish and dogs and of 50 mg/kg for calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, dairy cows, sheep and goats. For the other species, the calculated safe concentration in complete feed is 28 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 42 mg/kg for laying hens, 37 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening and 22 mg/kg for cats. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. No concerns for consumers were identified following the use of the additive at the use level considered safe in feed for the target species. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The use of the additive under the proposed conditions in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Camphor white oil was recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

show abstract

“…The remaining identified constituents of the essential oil are mainly aliphatic mono-or sesquiterpenes partially substituted with functional groups. They are structurally related to the substances evaluated by EFSA as CG 3 ((Z)-isocitral, (E)-isocitral and exo-isocitral) and CG 31 for use in animal feed (EFSA FEEDAP Panel, 2015a,b, 2016a for which EFSA concluded that they were 'extensively metabolised by the target species (see Section 3.3) and excreted as innocuous metabolites or carbon dioxide'. Therefore, no risk for the safety for the environment is foreseen.…”

Section: Safety For Usermentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil from the fruits of Litsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers. (litsea berry oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Additives¹,

Bampidis²,

Azimonti³

et al. 2021

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 an essential oil from the fruits of Litsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers. (litsea berry oil), when used as a sensory additive (flavouring) in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that litsea berry oil is safe up to the maximum proposed use level of 125 mg/kg complete feed for ornamental fish. For the other species, the calculated safe concentration in complete feed are 11 mg/kg for chicken for fattening, 16 mg/kg for laying hen, 14 mg/kg for turkey for fattening, 19 mg/kg for piglet, 23 mg/kg for pig for fattening, 28 mg/kg for lactating sow, 48 mg/kg for veal calf (milk replacer), 43 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep, goat and horse, 28 mg/kg for dairy cow, 17 mg/kg for rabbit, 47 mg/kg for salmon, 50 mg/kg for dog and 8.5 mg/kg for cat. The FEEDAP Panel also concluded that the use of litsea berry oil at the maximum proposed use level in water for drinking of 1 mg/kg is safe for all animal species. Simultaneous use in feed and water for drinking may lead to the maximum safe dose being exceeded. No concerns for consumer safety were identified following the use of the additive up to the highest safe use level in feed for the target animals. The essential oil under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The use of the additive in animal feed under the proposed conditions was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Litsea berry oil is recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

show abstract

Safety and efficacy of saturated and unsaturated aliphatic secondary alcohols, ketones and esters with esters containing secondary alcohols belonging to chemical group 5 when used as flavourings for all animal species

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Safety of 27 flavouring compounds providing a milky‐vanilla flavour and belonging to different chemical groups for use as feed additives in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Safety of 27 flavouring compounds providing a milky‐vanilla flavour and belonging to different chemical groups for use as feed additives in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil from Cinnamomum camphora (L.) J. Presl (camphor white oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil from the fruits of Litsea cubeba (Lour.) Pers. (litsea berry oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About