Bampidis Vasileios, Azimonti Giovanna, Bastos Maria de Lourdes, Christensen Henrik, Dusemund Birgit, Kouba Maryline, Durjava Mojca Fašmon, López-Alonso Marta, López Puente Secundino, Marcon Francesca, Mayo Baltasar, Pechová Alena, Petkova Mariana, Ramos Fernando, Sanz Yolanda, Villa Roberto Edoardo, Woutersen Ruud, Cocconcelli Pier Sandro, Glandorf Boet, Herman Lieve, Prieto Maradona Miguel, Saarela Maria, Dierick Noël, Martelli Giovanna, Brantom Paul, Tosti Luca, Svensson Kettil, Anguita Montserrat, Galobart Jaume, Innocenti Matteo, Pettenati Elisa, Revez Joana, Brozzi Rosella
EFSA J. 2021 May 17;19(5):e06534. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6534. eCollection 2021 May.
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 feed additive consisting of four bacteriophages infecting Gallinarum B/00111 (PCM F/00069, PCM F/00070, PCM F/00071 and PCM F/00097, trade name: Bafasal) when used as a zootechnical additive in water for drinking and liquid complementary feed for all avian species. The effects sought are the reduction of the spp. carriage in chickens for fattening, the improvement of their performance, or both. The host strain harbours an acquired antimicrobial resistance gene. No viable cells or DNA from the host organism were found in the additive. The four phages proved to be strictly lytic and to have a machinery allowing to package a unit-length of the viral genome. The manufacturing process excludes the presence of remnants from the propagation process in the final additive. Consequently, no concerns are expected from the nature and manufacture of the product. Considering this and the results of the tolerance study with chickens for fattening, the Panel concluded that Bafasal is safe for all avian species. Considering the nature and manufacturing process of the additive, Bafasal is not expected to pose a risk for consumers. The results of the subchronic oral toxicity study and genotoxicity studies provided support this conclusion. Exposure of users via inhalation is expected to be low, but Bafasal should be considered a respiratory sensitiser. No conclusions were drawn on the irritancy of Bafasal to skin and eyes or on its dermal sensitisation potential due to lack of data. Considering the nature and manufacturing process of the additive, Bafasal is safe for the environment. The Panel was not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of Bafasal for any avian species due to insufficient data.
应欧盟委员会的要求,动物饲料添加剂及产品或物质专家小组(FEEDAP)被要求就一种饲料添加剂发表科学意见,该添加剂由四种感染鸡白痢沙门氏菌B/00111的噬菌体(PCM F/00069、PCM F/00070、PCM F/00071和PCM F/00097,商品名:Bafasal)组成,用作所有禽类饮用水和液体补充饲料中的动物技术添加剂。预期效果是减少育肥鸡体内沙门氏菌的携带量,提高其生产性能,或两者兼具。宿主菌株携带一个获得性抗菌抗性基因。在添加剂中未发现来自宿主生物体的活细胞或DNA。这四种噬菌体被证明具有严格的裂解性,并且具有能够包装单位长度病毒基因组的机制。生产工艺排除了最终添加剂中存在繁殖过程残留的可能性。因此,预计该产品的性质和生产不会引起担忧。考虑到这一点以及育肥鸡耐受性研究的结果,专家小组得出结论,Bafasal对所有禽类都是安全的。考虑到添加剂的性质和生产工艺,预计Bafasal不会对消费者构成风险。亚慢性口服毒性研究和遗传毒性研究的结果支持了这一结论。预计使用者通过吸入接触的可能性较低,但Bafasal应被视为一种呼吸道致敏剂。由于缺乏数据,未就Bafasal对皮肤和眼睛的刺激性或其皮肤致敏潜力得出结论。考虑到添加剂的性质和生产工艺,Bafasal对环境是安全的。由于数据不足,专家小组无法就Bafasal对任何禽类的功效得出结论。