학술논문

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of a tincture derived from the fruit of Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss (parsley tincture) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl)
Document Type
article
Source
EFSA Journal, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp n/a-n/a (2023)
Subject
sensory additives
flavouring compounds
Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss
parley tincture
apiole
elemicin
Nutrition. Foods and food supply
TX341-641
Chemical technology
TP1-1185
Language
English
ISSN
1831-4732
Abstract
Abstract Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a tincture derived from the fruit of Petroselinum crispum (Mill.) Fuss (parsley tincture) when used as a sensory feed additive for all animal species. The product is a ■■■■■ solution, with a dry matter content of approximately 0.82%. The product contained 0.0198% polyphenols (of which 0.0085% were flavonoids), apiole (0.0083%), elemicin (0.0015%) and myristicin (0.0011%). The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the parsley tincture is safe at the maximum proposed use levels of 200 mg/kg complete feed for horses and 50 mg/kg complete feed for all other animal species. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount which is considered safe when consumed via feed. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of parsley tincture up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. Parsley tincture should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to apiole, elemicin and myristicin cannot be excluded. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. The use of parsley tincture as a flavour in animal feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Since the fruit of P. crispum and its preparations were recognised to provide flavour in food and their function in feed would be essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.