RT info:eu-repo/semantics/article
T1 Maximum levels of cross‐contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non‐target feed. Part 7: Amphenicols: florfenicol and thiamphenicol
A1 Koutsoumanis, Konstantinos
A1 Allende, Ana
A1 Álvarez Ordóñez, Avelino
A1 Bolton, Declan
A1 Bover‐Cid, Sara
A1 Chemaly, Marianne
A1 Davies, Robert
A1 De Cesare, Alessandra
A1 Herman, Lieve
A1 Hilbert, Friederike
A1 Lindqvist, Roland
A1 Nauta, Maarten
A1 Ru, Giuseppe
A1 Simmons, Marion
A1 Skandamis, Panagiotis
A1 Suffredini, Elisabetta
A1 Andersson, Dan I
A1 Bampidis, Vasileios
A1 Bengtsson‐Palme, Johan
A1 Bouchard, Damien
A1 Ferran, Aude
A1 Kouba, Maryline
A1 López Puente, Secundino
A1 López Alonso, Marta
A1 Nielsen, Søren Saxmose
A1 Pechová, Alena
A1 Petkova, Mariana
A1 Girault, Sebastien
A1 Broglia, Alessandro
A1 Guerra, Beatriz
A1 Innocenti, Matteo Lorenzo
A1 Liébana, Ernesto
A1 López Gálvez, Gloria
A1 Manini, Paola
A1 Stella, Pietro
A1 Peixe, Luisa
A2 Tecnologia de los Alimentos
K1 Tecnología de los alimentos
K1 Florfenicol
K1 Thiamphenicol
K1 Antimicrobial resistance
K1 Sub-inhibitory concentration
K1 Growth promotion
K1 Yield increase
K1 Food-producing animals
K1 3309 Tecnología de Los Alimentos
AB [EN] The specific concentrations of florfenicol and thiamphenicol 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. The FARSC for florfenicol was estimated. However, due to the lack of data, the calculation of the FARSC for thiamphenicol was not possible until further experimental data become available. To address growth promotion, data from scientific publications obtained from an extensive literature review were used. Levels in feed that showed to have an effect on growth promotion/increased yield were reported for florfenicol, whilst for thiamphenicol no suitable data for the assessment were available. Uncertainties and data gaps associated to the levels reported were addressed. For florfenicol, it was recommended to perform further studies to supply more diverse and complete data related to the requirements for calculation of the FARSC, whereas for thiamphenicol, the recommendation was to generate the data required to fill the gaps which prevented the FARSC calculation
PB Wiley
SN 1831-4732
LK https://hdl.handle.net/10612/20692
UL https://hdl.handle.net/10612/20692
NO Koutsoumanis, K., Allende, A., Álvarez Ordóñez, A., Bolton, D., Bover-Cid, S., Chemaly, M., Davies, R., De Cesare, A., Herman, L., Hilbert, F., Lindqvist, R., Nauta, M., Ru, G., Simmons, M., Skandamis, P., Suffredini, E., Andersson, D. I., Bampidis, V., Bengtsson-Palme, J., et al. (2021). Maximum levels of cross-contamination for 24 antimicrobial active substances in non-target feed. Part 7: Amphenicols: florfenicol and thiamphenicol. EFSA Journal, 19(10). https://doi.org/10.2903/J.EFSA.2021.6859
DS BULERIA. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de León
RD 30-jun-2024