Cargando…
Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals
An assessment was conducted on the level of inactivation of relevant pathogens that could be present in processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals when methods 2 to 5 and method 7, as detailed in Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, are applied. Five approved...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10320699/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37416785 http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8093 |
_version_ | 1785068490937335808 |
---|---|
author | Koutsoumanis, Konstantinos Allende, Ana Alvarez Ordoñez, Avelino Bolton, Declan Bover‐Cid, Sara Chemaly, Marianne Herman, Lieve Hilbert, Friederike Lindqvist, Roland Nauta, Maarten Nonno, Romolo Peixe, Luisa Skandamis, Panagiotis Suffredini, Elisabetta Fernandez Escamez, Pablo Gonzales‐Barron, Ursula Roberts, Helen Ru, Giuseppe Simmons, Marion Cruz, Ruben Barcia Lourenço Martins, Joana Messens, Winy Ortiz‐Pelaez, Angel Simon, Ancuta Cezara De Cesare, Alessandra |
author_facet | Koutsoumanis, Konstantinos Allende, Ana Alvarez Ordoñez, Avelino Bolton, Declan Bover‐Cid, Sara Chemaly, Marianne Herman, Lieve Hilbert, Friederike Lindqvist, Roland Nauta, Maarten Nonno, Romolo Peixe, Luisa Skandamis, Panagiotis Suffredini, Elisabetta Fernandez Escamez, Pablo Gonzales‐Barron, Ursula Roberts, Helen Ru, Giuseppe Simmons, Marion Cruz, Ruben Barcia Lourenço Martins, Joana Messens, Winy Ortiz‐Pelaez, Angel Simon, Ancuta Cezara De Cesare, Alessandra |
collection | PubMed |
description | An assessment was conducted on the level of inactivation of relevant pathogens that could be present in processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals when methods 2 to 5 and method 7, as detailed in Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, are applied. Five approved scenarios were selected for method 7. Salmonella Senftenberg, Enterococcus faecalis, spores of Clostridium perfringens and parvoviruses were shortlisted as target indicators. Inactivation parameters for these indicators were extracted from extensive literature search and a recent EFSA scientific opinion. An adapted Bigelow model was fitted to retrieved data to estimate the probability that methods 2 to 5, in coincidental and consecutive modes, and the five scenarios of method 7 are able to achieve a 5 log(10) and a 3 log(10) reduction of bacterial indicators and parvoviruses, respectively. Spores of C. perfringens were the indicator with the lowest probability of achieving the target reduction by methods 2 to 5, in coincidental and consecutive mode, and by the five considered scenarios of method 7. An expert knowledge elicitation was conducted to estimate the certainty of achieving a 5 log(10) reduction of spores of C. perfringens considering the results of the model and additional evidence. A 5 log(10) reduction of C. perfringens spores was judged: 99–100% certain for methods 2 and 3 in coincidental mode; 98–100% certain for method 7 scenario 3; 80–99% certain for method 5 in coincidental mode; 66–100% certain for method 4 in coincidental mode and for method 7 scenarios 4 and 5; 25–75% certain for method 7 scenario 2; and 0–5% certain for method 7 scenario 1. Higher certainty is expected for methods 2 to 5 in consecutive mode compared to coincidental mode. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10320699 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-103206992023-07-06 Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals Koutsoumanis, Konstantinos Allende, Ana Alvarez Ordoñez, Avelino Bolton, Declan Bover‐Cid, Sara Chemaly, Marianne Herman, Lieve Hilbert, Friederike Lindqvist, Roland Nauta, Maarten Nonno, Romolo Peixe, Luisa Skandamis, Panagiotis Suffredini, Elisabetta Fernandez Escamez, Pablo Gonzales‐Barron, Ursula Roberts, Helen Ru, Giuseppe Simmons, Marion Cruz, Ruben Barcia Lourenço Martins, Joana Messens, Winy Ortiz‐Pelaez, Angel Simon, Ancuta Cezara De Cesare, Alessandra EFSA J Scientific Opinion An assessment was conducted on the level of inactivation of relevant pathogens that could be present in processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals when methods 2 to 5 and method 7, as detailed in Regulation (EU) No 142/2011, are applied. Five approved scenarios were selected for method 7. Salmonella Senftenberg, Enterococcus faecalis, spores of Clostridium perfringens and parvoviruses were shortlisted as target indicators. Inactivation parameters for these indicators were extracted from extensive literature search and a recent EFSA scientific opinion. An adapted Bigelow model was fitted to retrieved data to estimate the probability that methods 2 to 5, in coincidental and consecutive modes, and the five scenarios of method 7 are able to achieve a 5 log(10) and a 3 log(10) reduction of bacterial indicators and parvoviruses, respectively. Spores of C. perfringens were the indicator with the lowest probability of achieving the target reduction by methods 2 to 5, in coincidental and consecutive mode, and by the five considered scenarios of method 7. An expert knowledge elicitation was conducted to estimate the certainty of achieving a 5 log(10) reduction of spores of C. perfringens considering the results of the model and additional evidence. A 5 log(10) reduction of C. perfringens spores was judged: 99–100% certain for methods 2 and 3 in coincidental mode; 98–100% certain for method 7 scenario 3; 80–99% certain for method 5 in coincidental mode; 66–100% certain for method 4 in coincidental mode and for method 7 scenarios 4 and 5; 25–75% certain for method 7 scenario 2; and 0–5% certain for method 7 scenario 1. Higher certainty is expected for methods 2 to 5 in consecutive mode compared to coincidental mode. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2023-07-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10320699/ /pubmed/37416785 http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8093 Text en © 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Scientific Opinion Koutsoumanis, Konstantinos Allende, Ana Alvarez Ordoñez, Avelino Bolton, Declan Bover‐Cid, Sara Chemaly, Marianne Herman, Lieve Hilbert, Friederike Lindqvist, Roland Nauta, Maarten Nonno, Romolo Peixe, Luisa Skandamis, Panagiotis Suffredini, Elisabetta Fernandez Escamez, Pablo Gonzales‐Barron, Ursula Roberts, Helen Ru, Giuseppe Simmons, Marion Cruz, Ruben Barcia Lourenço Martins, Joana Messens, Winy Ortiz‐Pelaez, Angel Simon, Ancuta Cezara De Cesare, Alessandra Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title | Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title_full | Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title_fullStr | Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title_full_unstemmed | Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title_short | Assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
title_sort | assessment on the efficacy of methods 2 to 5 and method 7 set out in commission regulation (eu) no 142/2011 to inactivate relevant pathogens when producing processed animal protein of porcine origin intended to feed poultry and aquaculture animals |
topic | Scientific Opinion |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10320699/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37416785 http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8093 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT koutsoumaniskonstantinos assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT allendeana assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT alvarezordonezavelino assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT boltondeclan assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT bovercidsara assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT chemalymarianne assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT hermanlieve assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT hilbertfriederike assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT lindqvistroland assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT nautamaarten assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT nonnoromolo assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT peixeluisa assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT skandamispanagiotis assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT suffredinielisabetta assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT fernandezescamezpablo assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT gonzalesbarronursula assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT robertshelen assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT rugiuseppe assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT simmonsmarion assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT cruzrubenbarcia assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT lourencomartinsjoana assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT messenswiny assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT ortizpelaezangel assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT simonancutacezara assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals AT decesarealessandra assessmentontheefficacyofmethods2to5andmethod7setoutincommissionregulationeuno1422011toinactivaterelevantpathogenswhenproducingprocessedanimalproteinofporcineoriginintendedtofeedpoultryandaquacultureanimals |