Update of the list of qualified presumption of safety (QPS) recommended microbiological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 21: Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2024

IF 3.3 3区农林科学 Q2 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

EFSA Journal Pub Date : 2025-01-20 DOI:10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9169

EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ), Ana Allende, Avelino Alvarez-Ordóñez, Valeria Bortolaia, Sara Bover-Cid, Alessandra De Cesare, Wietske Dohmen, Laurent Guillier, Liesbeth Jacxsens, Maarten Nauta, Lapo Mughini-Gras, Jakob Ottoson, Luisa Peixe, Fernando Perez-Rodriguez, Panagiotis Skandamis, Elisabetta Suffredini, Marianne Chemaly, Pier Sandro Cocconcelli, Pablo Salvador Fernández Escámez, Miguel Prieto Maradona, Amparo Querol, Lolke Sijtsma, Juan Evaristo Suarez, Ingvar Sundh, Angela Botteon, Barizzone Fulvio, Sandra Correia, Lieve Herman

{"title":"Update of the list of qualified presumption of safety (QPS) recommended microbiological agents intentionally added to food or feed as notified to EFSA 21: Suitability of taxonomic units notified to EFSA until September 2024","authors":"EFSA Panel on Biological Hazards (BIOHAZ), Ana Allende, Avelino Alvarez-Ordóñez, Valeria Bortolaia, Sara Bover-Cid, Alessandra De Cesare, Wietske Dohmen, Laurent Guillier, Liesbeth Jacxsens, Maarten Nauta, Lapo Mughini-Gras, Jakob Ottoson, Luisa Peixe, Fernando Perez-Rodriguez, Panagiotis Skandamis, Elisabetta Suffredini, Marianne Chemaly, Pier Sandro Cocconcelli, Pablo Salvador Fernández Escámez, Miguel Prieto Maradona, Amparo Querol, Lolke Sijtsma, Juan Evaristo Suarez, Ingvar Sundh, Angela Botteon, Barizzone Fulvio, Sandra Correia, Lieve Herman","doi":"10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) process was developed to provide a safety assessment approach for microorganisms intended for use in food or feed chains. In the period covered by this Statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS taxonomic units (TUs). The TUs in the QPS list were updated based on a verification, against their respective authoritative databases, of the correctness of the names and completeness of synonyms. Of 54 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2024 (33 as feed additives, 17 as food enzymes or additives, 4 as novel foods), 50 were not evaluated because: 12 were filamentous fungi, 1 was Enterococcus faecium and 8 were Escherichia coli (all excluded from the QPS evaluation), and 29 were TUs that already have a QPS status. One notification (Ensifer adhaerens) was already evaluated in a previous Panel Statement. Another notification (Enterococcus lactis) was already evaluated in the previous 3-year QPS cycle and was reassessed within this document. Two TUs were notified for the first time and were assessed for a possible QPS status: Serratia plymuthica and Lacticaseibacillus huelsenbergensis. Bacillus thuringiensis and Bacillus nakamurai have been assessed for a possible QPS status in response to internal requests. The following was concluded on the five assessed TUs. L. huelsenbergensis can be granted the QPS status based on its close relatedness to several other QPS Lacticaseibacillus species. E. lactis is not recommended for the QPS status due to insufficient information on safety. S. plymuthica and B. thuringiensis are not recommended for the QPS status due to safety concerns. B. nakamurai cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to a lack of body of knowledge for its use in the food and feed chain.","PeriodicalId":11657,"journal":{"name":"EFSA Journal","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11744300/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EFSA Journal","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9169","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) process was developed to provide a safety assessment approach for microorganisms intended for use in food or feed chains. In the period covered by this Statement, no new information was found that would change the status of previously recommended QPS taxonomic units (TUs). The TUs in the QPS list were updated based on a verification, against their respective authoritative databases, of the correctness of the names and completeness of synonyms. Of 54 microorganisms notified to EFSA between April and September 2024 (33 as feed additives, 17 as food enzymes or additives, 4 as novel foods), 50 were not evaluated because: 12 were filamentous fungi, 1 was Enterococcus faecium and 8 were Escherichia coli (all excluded from the QPS evaluation), and 29 were TUs that already have a QPS status. One notification (Ensifer adhaerens) was already evaluated in a previous Panel Statement. Another notification (Enterococcus lactis) was already evaluated in the previous 3-year QPS cycle and was reassessed within this document. Two TUs were notified for the first time and were assessed for a possible QPS status: Serratia plymuthica and Lacticaseibacillus huelsenbergensis. Bacillus thuringiensis and Bacillus nakamurai have been assessed for a possible QPS status in response to internal requests. The following was concluded on the five assessed TUs. L. huelsenbergensis can be granted the QPS status based on its close relatedness to several other QPS Lacticaseibacillus species. E. lactis is not recommended for the QPS status due to insufficient information on safety. S. plymuthica and B. thuringiensis are not recommended for the QPS status due to safety concerns. B. nakamurai cannot be recommended for the QPS list due to a lack of body of knowledge for its use in the food and feed chain.

查看原文本刊更多论文

更新通报给EFSA 21的有意添加到食品或饲料中的合格安全推定（QPS）推荐微生物制剂清单：通报给EFSA的分类单位的适用性，直至2024年9月。

制定了安全合格推定（QPS）流程，为食品或饲料链中使用的微生物提供了一种安全评估方法。在本声明所述期间，未发现任何可能改变先前推荐的QPS分类单位（TUs）地位的新信息。根据各自的权威数据库对名称的正确性和同义词的完整性进行验证，更新了QPS列表中的tu。在2024年4月至9月间向欧洲食品安全局通报的54种微生物中（33种作为饲料添加剂，17种作为食品酶或添加剂，4种作为新型食品），有50种未被评估，因为：12种是丝状真菌，1种是屎肠球菌，8种是大肠杆菌（都被排除在QPS评估之外），29种是已经具有QPS地位的微生物。一个通知（Ensifer adhaerens）已经在之前的专家组声明中进行了评估。另一个通报（乳酸肠球菌）已经在前3年QPS周期中进行了评估，并在本文件中进行了重新评估。首次通报了2个菌株，并对其进行了可能的QPS状态评估：沙雷氏菌（Serratia plymuthica）和韦氏乳杆菌（Lacticaseibacillus huelsenbergensis）。应内部要求，苏云金芽孢杆菌和中村芽孢杆菌已被评估为可能的QPS状态。以下是对五个评估的TUs的总结。L. huelsenbergensis与其他几个QPS乳酸菌有密切的亲缘关系，因此可以被授予QPS地位。由于安全性信息不足，不建议使用E. lactis作为QPS状态。出于安全考虑，不建议将普利茅菌和苏云金芽孢杆菌作为QPS。由于缺乏在食品和饲料链中使用的知识体系，因此不建议将B. nakamurai列入QPS清单。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

EFSA Journal Veterinary-Veterinary (miscellaneous)

CiteScore

5.20

自引率

21.20%

发文量

422

审稿时长

5 weeks

期刊介绍： The EFSA Journal covers methods of risk assessment, reports on data collected, and risk assessments in the individual areas of plant health, plant protection products and their residues, genetically modified organisms, additives and products or substances used in animal feed, animal health and welfare, biological hazards including BSE/TSE, contaminants in the food chain, food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids, food additives and nutrient sources added to food, dietetic products, nutrition and allergies.