Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 10: Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2019

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

83 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) procedure was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected by ‘qualifications’ which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's Scientific Panels. During the current assessment, no new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA from applications for market authorisation was updated with 47 biological agents, received between October 2018 and March 2019. Of these, 19 already had QPS status, 20 were excluded from the QPS exercise by the previous QPS mandate (11 filamentous fungi) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (9 notifications of Escherichia coli). Sphingomonas elodea, Gluconobacter frateurii, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Burkholderia ubonensis, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Microbacterium foliorum and Euglena gracilis were evaluated for the first time. Sphingomonas elodea cannot be assessed for a possible QPS recommendation because it is not a valid species. Corynebacterium ammoniagenes and Euglena gracilis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’. The following TUs cannot be recommended for the QPS list: Burkholderia ubonensis, due to its potential and confirmed ability to generate biologically active compounds and limited of body of knowledge; Corynebacterium casei, Gluconobacter frateurii and Microbacterium foliorum, due to lack of body of knowledge; Phaeodactylum tricornutum, based on the lack of a safe history of use in the food chain and limited knowledge on its potential production of bioactive compounds with possible toxic effects.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere05753
JournalEFSA Journal
Volume17
Issue number7
Number of pages79
ISSN1831-4732
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • bacteria
  • Burkholderia ubonensis
  • Corynebacterium ammoniagenes
  • Corynebacterium casei
  • Euglena gracilis
  • Gluconobacter frateurii
  • Microbacterium foliorum
  • Phaeodactylum tricornutum
  • QPS
  • safety
  • Sphingomonas elodea
  • yeast

Cite this

@article{c549a24c164844e8960b332341dcc7c6,
title = "Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 10: Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2019",
abstract = "The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) procedure was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected by ‘qualifications’ which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's Scientific Panels. During the current assessment, no new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA from applications for market authorisation was updated with 47 biological agents, received between October 2018 and March 2019. Of these, 19 already had QPS status, 20 were excluded from the QPS exercise by the previous QPS mandate (11 filamentous fungi) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (9 notifications of Escherichia coli). Sphingomonas elodea, Gluconobacter frateurii, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Burkholderia ubonensis, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Microbacterium foliorum and Euglena gracilis were evaluated for the first time. Sphingomonas elodea cannot be assessed for a possible QPS recommendation because it is not a valid species. Corynebacterium ammoniagenes and Euglena gracilis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’. The following TUs cannot be recommended for the QPS list: Burkholderia ubonensis, due to its potential and confirmed ability to generate biologically active compounds and limited of body of knowledge; Corynebacterium casei, Gluconobacter frateurii and Microbacterium foliorum, due to lack of body of knowledge; Phaeodactylum tricornutum, based on the lack of a safe history of use in the food chain and limited knowledge on its potential production of bioactive compounds with possible toxic effects.",
keywords = "bacteria, Burkholderia ubonensis, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Euglena gracilis, Gluconobacter frateurii, Microbacterium foliorum, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, QPS, safety, Sphingomonas elodea, yeast",
author = "{EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)} and Kostas Koutsoumanis and Ana Allende and Avelino Alvarez-Ord{\'o}{\~n}ez and Declan Bolton and Sara Bover-Cid and Marianne Chemaly and Robert Davies and {De Cesare}, Alessandra and Friederike Hilbert and Roland Lindqvist and Maarten Nauta and Luisa Peixe and Giuseppe Ru and Marion Simmons and Panagiotis Skandamis and Elisabetta Suffredini and Cocconcelli, {Pier Sandro} and {Fern{\'a}ndez Esc{\'a}mez}, {Pablo Salvador} and Maradona, {Miguel Prieto} and Amparo Querol and Suarez, {Juan Evaristo} and Ingvar Sundh and Just Vlak and Fulvio Barizzone and Sandra Correia and Lieve Herman",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5753",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
journal = "E F S A Journal",
issn = "1831-4732",
publisher = "European Food Safety Authority (E F S A)",
number = "7",

}

Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 10 : Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2019. / EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ).

In: EFSA Journal, Vol. 17, No. 7, e05753, 2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Update of the list of QPS-recommended biological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 10

T2 - Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until March 2019

AU - EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ)

AU - Koutsoumanis, Kostas

AU - Allende, Ana

AU - Alvarez-Ordóñez, Avelino

AU - Bolton, Declan

AU - Bover-Cid, Sara

AU - Chemaly, Marianne

AU - Davies, Robert

AU - De Cesare, Alessandra

AU - Hilbert, Friederike

AU - Lindqvist, Roland

AU - Nauta, Maarten

AU - Peixe, Luisa

AU - Ru, Giuseppe

AU - Simmons, Marion

AU - Skandamis, Panagiotis

AU - Suffredini, Elisabetta

AU - Cocconcelli, Pier Sandro

AU - Fernández Escámez, Pablo Salvador

AU - Maradona, Miguel Prieto

AU - Querol, Amparo

AU - Suarez, Juan Evaristo

AU - Sundh, Ingvar

AU - Vlak, Just

AU - Barizzone, Fulvio

AU - Correia, Sandra

AU - Herman, Lieve

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) procedure was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected by ‘qualifications’ which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's Scientific Panels. During the current assessment, no new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA from applications for market authorisation was updated with 47 biological agents, received between October 2018 and March 2019. Of these, 19 already had QPS status, 20 were excluded from the QPS exercise by the previous QPS mandate (11 filamentous fungi) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (9 notifications of Escherichia coli). Sphingomonas elodea, Gluconobacter frateurii, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Burkholderia ubonensis, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Microbacterium foliorum and Euglena gracilis were evaluated for the first time. Sphingomonas elodea cannot be assessed for a possible QPS recommendation because it is not a valid species. Corynebacterium ammoniagenes and Euglena gracilis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’. The following TUs cannot be recommended for the QPS list: Burkholderia ubonensis, due to its potential and confirmed ability to generate biologically active compounds and limited of body of knowledge; Corynebacterium casei, Gluconobacter frateurii and Microbacterium foliorum, due to lack of body of knowledge; Phaeodactylum tricornutum, based on the lack of a safe history of use in the food chain and limited knowledge on its potential production of bioactive compounds with possible toxic effects.

AB - The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) procedure was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-evaluation to support safety risk assessments of biological agents performed by EFSA's Scientific Panels. The taxonomic identity, body of knowledge, safety concerns and antimicrobial resistance were assessed. Safety concerns identified for a taxonomic unit (TU) are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected by ‘qualifications’ which should be assessed at the strain level by the EFSA's Scientific Panels. During the current assessment, no new information was found that would change the previously recommended QPS TUs and their qualifications. The list of microorganisms notified to EFSA from applications for market authorisation was updated with 47 biological agents, received between October 2018 and March 2019. Of these, 19 already had QPS status, 20 were excluded from the QPS exercise by the previous QPS mandate (11 filamentous fungi) or from further evaluations within the current mandate (9 notifications of Escherichia coli). Sphingomonas elodea, Gluconobacter frateurii, Corynebacterium ammoniagenes, Corynebacterium casei, Burkholderia ubonensis, Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Microbacterium foliorum and Euglena gracilis were evaluated for the first time. Sphingomonas elodea cannot be assessed for a possible QPS recommendation because it is not a valid species. Corynebacterium ammoniagenes and Euglena gracilis can be recommended for the QPS list with the qualification ‘for production purposes only’. The following TUs cannot be recommended for the QPS list: Burkholderia ubonensis, due to its potential and confirmed ability to generate biologically active compounds and limited of body of knowledge; Corynebacterium casei, Gluconobacter frateurii and Microbacterium foliorum, due to lack of body of knowledge; Phaeodactylum tricornutum, based on the lack of a safe history of use in the food chain and limited knowledge on its potential production of bioactive compounds with possible toxic effects.

KW - bacteria

KW - Burkholderia ubonensis

KW - Corynebacterium ammoniagenes

KW - Corynebacterium casei

KW - Euglena gracilis

KW - Gluconobacter frateurii

KW - Microbacterium foliorum

KW - Phaeodactylum tricornutum

KW - QPS

KW - safety

KW - Sphingomonas elodea

KW - yeast

U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5753

DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5753

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:85070193368

VL - 17

JO - E F S A Journal

JF - E F S A Journal

SN - 1831-4732

IS - 7

M1 - e05753

ER -