Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium

Abstract The specific concentrations of amprolium in non‐target feed for food‐producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in fe...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ), Konstantinos Koutsoumanis, Ana Allende, Avelino Alvarez‐Ordóñez, Declan Bolton, Sara Bover‐Cid, Marianne Chemaly, Robert Davies, Alessandra De Cesare, Lieve Herman, Friederike Hilbert, Roland Lindqvist, Maarten Nauta, Giuseppe Ru, Marion Simmons, Panagiotis Skandamis, Elisabetta Suffredini, Dan I Andersson, Vasileios Bampidis, Johan Bengtsson‐Palme, Damien Bouchard, Aude Ferran, Maryline Kouba, Secundino López Puente, Marta López‐Alonso, Søren Saxmose Nielsen, Alena Pechová, Mariana Petkova, Sebastien Girault, Alessandro Broglia, Beatriz Guerra, Matteo Lorenzo Innocenti, Ernesto Liébana, Gloria López‐Gálvez, Paola Manini, Pietro Stella, Luisa Peixe
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Wiley 2021
Materias:	amprolium antimicrobial resistance subinhibitory concentration Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC), growth promotion yield increase food‐producing animals Nutrition. Foods and food supply TX341-641 Chemical technology TP1-1185
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/40bdc3d9853b4d879eaf6a21c8009a42
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:40bdc3d9853b4d879eaf6a21c8009a42
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:40bdc3d9853b4d879eaf6a21c8009a422021-11-23T08:30:51ZMaximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium1831-473210.2903/j.efsa.2021.6854https://doaj.org/article/40bdc3d9853b4d879eaf6a21c8009a422021-10-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6854https://doaj.org/toc/1831-4732Abstract The specific concentrations of amprolium in non‐target feed for food‐producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for amprolium, it was not possible to conclude the assessment. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of amprolium in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. The lack of antibacterial activity at clinically relevant concentrations for amprolium suggests that further studies relating to bacterial resistance are not a priority.EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)Konstantinos KoutsoumanisAna AllendeAvelino Alvarez‐OrdóñezDeclan BoltonSara Bover‐CidMarianne ChemalyRobert DaviesAlessandra De CesareLieve HermanFriederike HilbertRoland LindqvistMaarten NautaGiuseppe RuMarion SimmonsPanagiotis SkandamisElisabetta SuffrediniDan I AnderssonVasileios BampidisJohan Bengtsson‐PalmeDamien BouchardAude FerranMaryline KoubaSecundino López PuenteMarta López‐AlonsoSøren Saxmose NielsenAlena PechováMariana PetkovaSebastien GiraultAlessandro BrogliaBeatriz GuerraMatteo Lorenzo InnocentiErnesto LiébanaGloria López‐GálvezPaola ManiniPietro StellaLuisa PeixeWileyarticleamproliumantimicrobial resistancesubinhibitory concentrationFeed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC), growth promotionyield increasefood‐producing animalsNutrition. Foods and food supplyTX341-641Chemical technologyTP1-1185ENEFSA Journal, Vol 19, Iss 10, Pp n/a-n/a (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	amprolium antimicrobial resistance subinhibitory concentration Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC), growth promotion yield increase food‐producing animals Nutrition. Foods and food supply TX341-641 Chemical technology TP1-1185
spellingShingle	amprolium antimicrobial resistance subinhibitory concentration Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC), growth promotion yield increase food‐producing animals Nutrition. Foods and food supply TX341-641 Chemical technology TP1-1185 EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Avelino Alvarez‐Ordóñez Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Robert Davies Alessandra De Cesare Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Panagiotis Skandamis Elisabetta Suffredini Dan I Andersson Vasileios Bampidis Johan Bengtsson‐Palme Damien Bouchard Aude Ferran Maryline Kouba Secundino López Puente Marta López‐Alonso Søren Saxmose Nielsen Alena Pechová Mariana Petkova Sebastien Girault Alessandro Broglia Beatriz Guerra Matteo Lorenzo Innocenti Ernesto Liébana Gloria López‐Gálvez Paola Manini Pietro Stella Luisa Peixe Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
description	Abstract The specific concentrations of amprolium in non‐target feed for food‐producing animals, below which there would not be an effect on the emergence of, and/or selection for, resistance in bacteria relevant for human and animal health, as well as the specific antimicrobial concentrations in feed which have an effect in terms of growth promotion/increased yield were assessed by EFSA in collaboration with EMA. Details of the methodology used for this assessment, associated data gaps and uncertainties, are presented in a separate document. To address antimicrobial resistance, the Feed Antimicrobial Resistance Selection Concentration (FARSC) model developed specifically for the assessment was applied. However, due to the lack of data on the parameters required to calculate the FARSC for amprolium, it was not possible to conclude the assessment. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels of amprolium in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported. The lack of antibacterial activity at clinically relevant concentrations for amprolium suggests that further studies relating to bacterial resistance are not a priority.
format	article
author	EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Avelino Alvarez‐Ordóñez Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Robert Davies Alessandra De Cesare Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Panagiotis Skandamis Elisabetta Suffredini Dan I Andersson Vasileios Bampidis Johan Bengtsson‐Palme Damien Bouchard Aude Ferran Maryline Kouba Secundino López Puente Marta López‐Alonso Søren Saxmose Nielsen Alena Pechová Mariana Petkova Sebastien Girault Alessandro Broglia Beatriz Guerra Matteo Lorenzo Innocenti Ernesto Liébana Gloria López‐Gálvez Paola Manini Pietro Stella Luisa Peixe
author_facet	EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ) Konstantinos Koutsoumanis Ana Allende Avelino Alvarez‐Ordóñez Declan Bolton Sara Bover‐Cid Marianne Chemaly Robert Davies Alessandra De Cesare Lieve Herman Friederike Hilbert Roland Lindqvist Maarten Nauta Giuseppe Ru Marion Simmons Panagiotis Skandamis Elisabetta Suffredini Dan I Andersson Vasileios Bampidis Johan Bengtsson‐Palme Damien Bouchard Aude Ferran Maryline Kouba Secundino López Puente Marta López‐Alonso Søren Saxmose Nielsen Alena Pechová Mariana Petkova Sebastien Girault Alessandro Broglia Beatriz Guerra Matteo Lorenzo Innocenti Ernesto Liébana Gloria López‐Gálvez Paola Manini Pietro Stella Luisa Peixe
author_sort	EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)
title	Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
title_short	Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
title_full	Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
title_fullStr	Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
title_full_unstemmed	Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium
title_sort	maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. part 3: amprolium
publisher	Wiley
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/40bdc3d9853b4d879eaf6a21c8009a42
work_keys_str_mv	AT efsapanelonbiologicalhazardsbiohaz maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT konstantinoskoutsoumanis maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT anaallende maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT avelinoalvarezordonez maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT declanbolton maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT sarabovercid maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT mariannechemaly maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT robertdavies maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT alessandradecesare maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT lieveherman maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT friederikehilbert maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT rolandlindqvist maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT maartennauta maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT giusepperu maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT marionsimmons maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT panagiotisskandamis maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT elisabettasuffredini maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT daniandersson maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT vasileiosbampidis maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT johanbengtssonpalme maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT damienbouchard maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT audeferran maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT marylinekouba maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT secundinolopezpuente maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT martalopezalonso maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT sørensaxmosenielsen maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT alenapechova maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT marianapetkova maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT sebastiengirault maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT alessandrobroglia maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT beatrizguerra maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT matteolorenzoinnocenti maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT ernestoliebana maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT glorialopezgalvez maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT paolamanini maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT pietrostella maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium AT luisapeixe maximumlevelsofcrosscontaminationfor24antimicrobialactivesubstancesinnontargetfeedpart3amprolium
_version_	1718416821747449856

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium

Ejemplares similares

Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 3: Amprolium