FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2023; 21(4); e07952; doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7952

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil obtained from the oleoresin of Pinus pinaster Aiton (pine white oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Abstract: Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil obtained from the oleoresin of Aiton (pine white oil, also known as turpentine oil), when used as a sensory additive in feed and water for drinking for all animal species. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the essential oil under assessment is safe up to the maximum proposed use levels of 35 mg/kg for laying hens, piglets, pigs for fattening, sows, rabbits, salmonids, 50 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer), cattle for fattening, dairy cows, horses, dogs and ornamental fish, 20 mg/kg for cats. For the other species, the calculated safe concentrations in complete feed were 25 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening, 33 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening and 14 mg/kg for ornamental birds. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive was considered safe at 20 mg/kg complete feed. No concerns for consumers were identified following the use of pine white oil up to the maximum proposed use levels in feed. The additive under assessment should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. The use of pine white oil at the proposed use level in feed was not expected to pose a risk for the environment. Pine white oil was recognised to flavour food. Since its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.
© 2023 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by Wiley‐VCH GmbH on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-04-17 PubMed ID: 37077300PubMed Central: PMC10107389DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7952Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article presents the study carried out by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on the safety and efficacy of essential oil derived from Pinus Pinaster, also known as Pine White Oil or Turpentine Oil, as a feed and drinking water additive for animals of all species. The study concluded that Pine White Oil is safe up to specified levels for various animals, poses no risk to the environment and no risk to consumers, however, it can be irritant to skin, eyes, and cause skin and respiratory sensitization.

EFSA’s Request and Aim of the Study

  • The European Commission requested the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to provide a scientific opinion on the safety and effectiveness of Pine White Oil as a sensory additive for animal feeds and drinking water intended for all species of animals.

Study Conducted by the FEEDAP Panel

  • The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) conducted the study. They set out to determine the safe levels of use of the Pine White Oil in the feed and drinking water of various species of animals.

Conclusions on Safe Levels of Use

  • Based on their study, the panel concluded safe levels for specific animals, ranging from 14 mg/kg for ornamental birds to 50 mg/kg for animals such as veal calves, horses, and dogs. The safe level for any other species was established at 20 mg/kg.

Consumer Safety and Environmental Impact

  • The study found that the use of Pine White Oil up to the stipulated levels poses no risk to consumers.
  • Moreover, the proposed level of use of this oil in animal feed is not expected to cause any significant environmental impact.

The Impact on the Skin, Eyes, and Respiratory System

  • Despite its safety when used at recommended levels in feed, the study revealed that Pine White Oil could have a negative impact, causing irritation to the skin and eyes and sensitizing the skin and respiratory system.

Applications in Food Flavoring and Feed

  • Pine White Oil has been recognized for its application in food flavoring. Due to this recognition and since its function in animal feed is expected to be similar to its role in food, the EFSA did not consider it necessary to carry out further demonstration of its effectiveness.

Cite This Article

APA
Bampidis V, Azimonti G, Bastos ML, Christensen H, Durjava M, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, López Puente S, Marcon F, Mayo B, Pechová A, Petkova M, Ramos F, Sanz Y, Villa RE, Woutersen R, Brantom P, Chesson A, Westendorf J, Manini P, Pizzo F, Dusemund B. (2023). Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil obtained from the oleoresin of Pinus pinaster Aiton (pine white oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl). EFSA J, 21(4), e07952. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7952

Publication

EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority
ISSN: 1831-4732
NlmUniqueID: 101642076
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 21
Issue: 4
Pages: e07952
PII: e07952

Researcher Affiliations

Bampidis, Vasileios
    Azimonti, Giovanna
      Bastos, Maria de Lourdes
        Christensen, Henrik
          Durjava, Mojca
            Kouba, Maryline
              López-Alonso, Marta
                López Puente, Secundino
                  Marcon, Francesca
                    Mayo, Baltasar
                      Pechová, Alena
                        Petkova, Mariana
                          Ramos, Fernando
                            Sanz, Yolanda
                              Villa, Roberto Edoardo
                                Woutersen, Ruud
                                  Brantom, Paul
                                    Chesson, Andrew
                                      Westendorf, Johannes
                                        Manini, Paola
                                          Pizzo, Fabiola
                                            Dusemund, Birgit

                                              References

                                              This article includes 32 references
                                              1. Burdock GA. Fenaroli's handbook of flavor ingredients. 6th Edition. CRC press. Taylor & Francis Group. Boca Raton, FL, pp. 1967–1968.
                                                doi: 10.1201/9781439847503google scholar: lookup
                                              2. Court MH, Greenblatt DJ. Molecular basis for deficient acetaminophen glucuronidation in cats. An interspecies comparison of enzyme kinetics in liver microsomes.. Biochem Pharmacol 1997 Apr 4;53(7):1041-7.
                                                doi: 10.1016/s0006-2952(97)00072-5pubmed: 9174118google scholar: lookup
                                              3. Cramer GM, Ford RA, Hall RL. Estimation of toxic hazard--a decision tree approach.. Food Cosmet Toxicol 1978 Jun;16(3):255-76.
                                                doi: 10.1016/s0015-6264(76)80522-6pubmed: 357272google scholar: lookup
                                              4. EFSA. Compendium of botanicals reported to contain naturally occurring substances of possible concern for human health when used in food and food supplements. EFSA Journal 2012;10(5):2663, 60 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2663google scholar: lookup
                                              5. EFSA CEF Panel. Guidance on the data required for the risk assessment of flavourings. EFSA Journal 2010;8(6):1623, 38 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2093/j.efsa.2010.1623google scholar: lookup
                                              6. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 59, Revision 1 (FGE.59Rev1): Consideration of aliphatic and aromatic ethers evaluated by JECFA (61st meeting and 63rd meeting) structurally related to aliphatic, alicyclic and aromatic ethers including anisole derivatives evaluated by EFSA in FGE.23 Rev2 (2010). EFSA Journal 2011;9(5):2158, 32 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2158google scholar: lookup
                                              7. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 25, Revision 2 (FGE.25Rev2): Aliphatic hydrocarbons from chemical group 31. EFSA Journal 2011;9(6):2177, 126 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2177google scholar: lookup
                                              8. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 47, Revision 1: Bi‐ and tricyclic secondary, ketones and related esters from chemical groups 7 and 8. EFSA Journal 2012;10(3):2637, 43 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2637google scholar: lookup
                                              9. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 82, Revision 1 (FGE.82Rev1): Consideration of Epoxides evaluated by the JECFA (65th meeting). EFSA Journal 2014;12(6):3708, 32 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3708google scholar: lookup
                                              10. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 25, Revision 3 (FGE.25Rev3): Aliphatic hydrocarbons from chemical group 31. EFSA Journal 2015;13(4):4069, 116 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4069google scholar: lookup
                                              11. EFSA CEF Panel. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 78, Revision 2 (FGE.78Rev2): consideration of aliphatic and alicyclic and aromatic hydrocarbons evaluated by JECFA (63rd meeting) structurally related to aliphatic hydrocarbons evaluated by EFSA in FGE.25Rev3. EFSA Journal 2015;13(4):4067, 72 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4067google scholar: lookup
                                              12. Silano V, Bolognesi C, Castle L, Cravedi JP, Engel KH, Fowler P, Franz R, Grob K, Husøy T, Kärenlampi S, Mennes W, Milana MR, Penninks A, Smith A, de Fátima Tavares Poças M, Tlustos C, Wölfle D, Zorn H, Zugravu CA, Binderup ML, Marcon F, Marzin D, Mosesso P, Anastassiadou M, Carfì M, Saarma S, Gürtler R. Scientific Opinion on Flavouring Group Evaluation 208 Revision 2 (FGE.208Rev2): Consideration of genotoxicity data on alicyclic aldehydes with α,β-unsaturation in ring/side-chain and precursors from chemical subgroup 2.2 of FGE.19.. EFSA J 2017 May;15(5):e04766.
                                                pmc: PMC7010107pubmed: 32625478doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4766google scholar: lookup
                                              13. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Statement on the use of feed additives authorised/applied for use in feed when supplied via water. EFSA Journal 2010;8(12):1956, 9 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1956google scholar: lookup
                                              14. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of aliphatic, alicyclic and aromatic saturated and unsaturated tertiary alcohols and esters with esters containing tertiary alcohols ethers (chemical group 6) when used as flavourings for all animal species. EFSA Journal 2012;10(11):2966, 25 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2966google scholar: lookup
                                              15. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Guidance for the preparation of dossiers for sensory additives. EFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2534, 26 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2534google scholar: lookup
                                              16. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Guidance on studies concerning the safety of use of the additive for users/workers. EFSA Journal 2012;10(1):2539, 5 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2539google scholar: lookup
                                              17. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Scientific Opinion on the safety and efficacy of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons (chemical group 31) when used as flavourings for all animal species. EFSA Journal 2015;13(3):4053, 22 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4053google scholar: lookup
                                              18. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of secondary alicyclic saturated and unsaturated alcohols, ketones, ketals and esters with ketals containing alicyclic alcohols or ketones and esters containing secondary alicyclic alcohols from chemical group 8 when used as flavourings for all animal species. EFSA Journal 2016;14(6):4475, 26 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4475google scholar: lookup
                                              19. EFSA FEEDAP Panel. Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons (chemical Group 31) when used as flavourings for all animal species and categories. EFSA Journal 2016;14(1):4339, 17 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4339google scholar: lookup
                                              20. EFSA FEEDAP Panel, Rychen G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, de Lourdes BM, Bories G, Chesson A, Cocconcelli PS, Flachowsky G, Gropp J, Kolar B, Kouba M, López‐Alonso M, López Puente S, Mantovani A, Mayo B, Ramos F, Saarela M, Villa RE, Wallace RJ, Wester P, Costa LG, Lundebye A‐K, Renshaw D, Holczknecht O, Vettori MV, Aquilina G. Scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of tartrazine(E 102) for cats and dogs, ornamental fish, grain‐eating ornamental birds and small rodents. EFSA Journal 2016;14(11):4613, 14 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4613google scholar: lookup
                                              21. Rychen G, Aquilina G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, Bastos ML, Bories G, Chesson A, Cocconcelli PS, Flachowsky G, Gropp J, Kolar B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, López Puente S, Mantovani A, Mayo B, Ramos F, Saarela M, Villa RE, Wallace RJ, Wester P, Anguita M, Galobart J, Innocenti ML. Guidance on the identity, characterisation and conditions of use of feed additives.. EFSA J 2017 Oct;15(10):e05023.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5023pmc: PMC7010039pubmed: 32625313google scholar: lookup
                                              22. Rychen G, Aquilina G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, Bastos ML, Bories G, Chesson A, Cocconcelli PS, Flachowsky G, Gropp J, Kolar B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, López Puente S, Mantovani A, Mayo B, Ramos F, Saarela M, Villa RE, Wallace RJ, Wester P, Anguita M, Galobart J, Innocenti ML, Martino L. Guidance on the assessment of the safety of feed additives for the target species.. EFSA J 2017 Oct;15(10):e05021.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5021pmc: PMC7009839pubmed: 32625311google scholar: lookup
                                              23. EFSA FEEDAP Panel, Rychen G, Aquilina G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, Bastos ML, Bories G, Chesson A, Cocconcelli PS, Flachowsky G, Gropp J, Kolar B, Kouba M, López‐Alonso M, López Puente S, Mantovani A, Mayo B, Ramos F, Saarela M, Villa RE, Wallace RJ, Wester P, Anguita M, Dujardin B, Galobart J, Innocenti ML. Guidance on the assessment of the safety of feed additives for the consumer. EFSA Journal 2017;15(10):5022, 17 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5022google scholar: lookup
                                              24. Rychen G, Aquilina G, Azimonti G, Bampidis V, Bastos ML, Bories G, Chesson A, Cocconcelli PS, Flachowsky G, Gropp J, Kolar B, Kouba M, López-Alonso M, López Puente S, Mantovani A, Mayo B, Ramos F, Saarela M, Villa RE, Wallace RJ, Wester P, Anguita M, Galobart J, Innocenti ML, Martino L. Guidance on the assessment of the efficacy of feed additives.. EFSA J 2018 May;16(5):e05274.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5274pmc: PMC7009555pubmed: 32625911google scholar: lookup
                                              25. EFSA FEEDAP Panel, Bampidis V, Bastos ML, Christensen H, Dusemund B, Kouba M, Kos Durjava M, López‐Alonso M, López Puente S, Marcon F, Mayo B, Pechová A, Petkova M, Ramos F, Sanz Y, Villa RE, Woutersen R, Brock T, Knecht J, Kolar B, Beelen P, Padovani L, Tarrés‐Call J, Vettori MV, Azimonti G. Guidance on the assessment of the safety of feed additives for the environment. EFSA Journal 2019;17(4):5648, 78 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5648google scholar: lookup
                                              26. EFSA Scientific Committee. Guidance on safety assessment of botanicals and botanical preparations intended for use as ingredients in food supplements, on request of EFSA. EFSA Journal 2009;7(9):1249, 19 pp.
                                                doi: 10.2093/j.efsa.2009.1249google scholar: lookup
                                              27. More SJ, Bampidis V, Benford D, Bennekou SH, Bragard C, Halldorsson TI, Hernández-Jerez AF, Koutsoumanis K, Naegeli H, Schlatter JR, Silano V, Nielsen SS, Schrenk D, Turck D, Younes M, Benfenati E, Castle L, Cedergreen N, Hardy A, Laskowski R, Leblanc JC, Kortenkamp A, Ragas A, Posthuma L, Svendsen C, Solecki R, Testai E, Dujardin B, Kass GE, Manini P, Jeddi MZ, Dorne JC, Hogstrand C. Guidance on harmonised methodologies for human health, animal health and ecological risk assessment of combined exposure to multiple chemicals.. EFSA J 2019 Mar;17(3):e05634.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5634pmc: PMC7009070pubmed: 32626259google scholar: lookup
                                              28. More SJ, Bampidis V, Benford D, Bragard C, Halldorsson TI, Hernández-Jerez AF, Hougaard Bennekou S, Koutsoumanis KP, Machera K, Naegeli H, Nielsen SS, Schlatter JR, Schrenk D, Silano V, Turck D, Younes M, Gundert-Remy U, Kass GEN, Kleiner J, Rossi AM, Serafimova R, Reilly L, Wallace HM. Guidance on the use of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern approach in food safety assessment.. EFSA J 2019 Jun;17(6):e05708.
                                                doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5708pmc: PMC7009090pubmed: 32626331google scholar: lookup
                                              29. Lautz LS, Jeddi MZ, Girolami F, Nebbia C, Dorne JLCM. Metabolism and pharmacokinetics of pharmaceuticals in cats (Felix sylvestris catus) and implications for the risk assessment of feed additives and contaminants.. Toxicol Lett 2021 Mar 1;338:114-127.
                                                doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.11.014pubmed: 33253781google scholar: lookup
                                              30. Munro IC, Ford RA, Kennepohl E, Sprenger JG. Correlation of structural class with no-observed-effect levels: a proposal for establishing a threshold of concern.. Food Chem Toxicol 1996 Sep;34(9):829-67.
                                                doi: 10.1016/s0278-6915(96)00049-xpubmed: 8972878google scholar: lookup
                                              31. PhEur. Turpentine oil (Terebinthinae aetheroleum). European Pharmacopoeia 11th Edition. Monograph 07/2014:1627. Corrected 9.4. European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and Health.
                                              32. Tisserand R, Young R. Essential oil safety. A Guide for Health Care Professionals. Chapter 13. Essential oil profiles. 2nd edn. Elsevier Ltd. pp. 398–399.
                                                doi: 10.1016/C2009-0-52351-3google scholar: lookup

                                              Citations

                                              This article has been cited 0 times.
                                              Subscribe to our newsletter
                                              Join 99,727 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.