Scientific Opinion on the safety and efficacy of citric acid when used as a technological additive (preservative) for all animal species
2015; Wiley; Volume: 13; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês
10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4009
ISSN1831-4732
Tópico(s)Animal Nutrition and Physiology
ResumoEFSA JournalVolume 13, Issue 2 4009 OpinionOpen Access Scientific Opinion on the safety and efficacy of citric acid when used as a technological additive (preservative) for all animal species EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP)Search for more papers by this author EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP), EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP)Search for more papers by this author First published: 22 March 2016 https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2015.4009Citations: 3 Panel members: Gabriele Aquilina, Vasileios Bampidis, Maria De Lourdes Bastos, Lucio Guido Costa, Gerhard Flachowsky, Mikolaj Antoni Gralak, Christer Hogstrand, Lubomir Leng, Secundino López-Puente, Giovanna Martelli, Baltasar Mayo, Fernando Ramos, Derek Renshaw, Guido Rychen, Maria Saarela, Kristen Sejrsen, Patrick Van Beelen, Robert John Wallace and Johannes Westendorf. Correspondence: FEEDAP@efsa.europa.eu Acknowledgement: The Panel wishes to thank the members of the Working Group on Organic acids, including Andrew Chesson, Noel Dierick, Jurgen Gropp and Piet Wester, for the preparatory work on this scientific opinion. Adoption date: 27 January 2015 Published date: 22 March 2016 Question number: EFSA-Q-2011-00750 On request from: European Commission AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Abstract An application has been made for the re-authorisation of citric acid (anhydrous and monohydrate) when used as a preservative in feed and also for the new use in water for drinking for all animal species. Citric acid (anhydrous and monohydrate) is already authorised for use in food and feed as a preservative following the quantum satis principle. There is evidence from published studies that citric acid is safe for the target species when used up to 30 000 mg citric acid/kg complete feedingstuffs and the corresponding concentration in water for drinking (10 000 mg citric acid/L). The additive is, consequently, also safe for the target species at the proposed conditions of use of 15 000 mg citric acid/kg complete feedingstuffs and 5 000 mg citric acid/L in water for drinking. The quality of available data does not allow a margin of safety to be derived. The use of citric acid in animal nutrition is safe for the consumer. It is prudent to regard citric acid as potentially hazardous to workers by exposure of the skin, eyes or mucous membranes or by inhalation. The use of citric acid in animal nutrition would not pose a risk to the environment. Although citric acid is a well-recognised preservative in food, based on data provided the effectiveness of citric acid as a preservative in feedingstuffs and water for drinking was not sufficiently demonstrated. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) has reservations about the effectiveness of organic acids as preservatives in feedingstuffs with a typical moisture content of ≤ 12 %. References Allen V, Horn F and Fontenot J, 1986. Influence of ingestion of aluminium, citric acid and soil on mineral metabolism of lactating beef cows. Journal of Animal Science, 62, 1396– 1403. Allen V, Fontenot J and Rahnema S, 1990. Influence of aluminium citrate and citric acid on mineral metabolism in wether sheep. Journal of Animal Science, 68, 2496– 2505. Boling SD, Webel DM, Mavromichalis I, Parsons CM and Baker DH, 2000. The effects of citric acid on phytate-phosphorus utilization in young chicks and pigs. Journal of Animal Science, 78, 682– 689. De Vuyst A, Moreels A, Ska P and Arnould R, 1972. The action of citric acid in the feeding of veal calves and its economic repercussions. Zootecnia, XXI, 461– 483. Ebrahimnezhad Y, Shivazad M, Taherkhani R and Nazeradi K, 2008. Effects of citric acid and microbial phytase supplementation on performance and phytate phosphorus utilisation in broiler chicks. Journal of Poultry Science, 45, 20– 24. EC (European Commission), 1991. Food science and techniques. First series of food additives of various technological functions. Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF), 25th series. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/reports/scf_reports_25.pdf. Henry RW, Pickard DW and Hughes PE, 1985. Citric acid and fumaric acid as food additives for early weaned piglets. Animal Production, 40, 505– 509. Hill T, Bateman H, Aldrich J, Quigley J and Schlotterbeck R, 2013. Evaluation of ad libitum acidified milk replacer programs for dairy calves. Journal of Dairy Science, 96, 3153– 3162. House WA and Van Campen D, 1971. Magnesium metabolism of sheep fed different levels of potassium and citric acid. Journal of Nutrition, 101, 1483– 1492. JEFCA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives), 1974. Toxicological evaluation of some food additives including anticaking agents, antimicrobials, antioxidants, emulsifiers, and thickening agents. WHO Food Additives Series, 5. Available online: http://www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v05je24.htm. Kil D, Kwon W and Kim B, 2011, Dietary acidifiers in weanling pig diets: a review. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias, 24, 231– 247. Matsuda T, Yano T, Maruyama A and Kumagai H, 1994. Antimicrobial activities of organic acids determined by minimum inhibitory concentrations at different pH ranged from 4.0 to 7.0. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 41, 687– 702. Nordic Working Group on Food Toxicology and Risk Assessment (NNT), 2002. Food additives in Europe 2000 – Status of safety assessment of food additives presently permitted in the EU. Nordic Council of Ministers, TemaNord, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 322– 327. Partanen K, 2001. Organic acids – their efficacy and modes of action in pigs. In: Gut Environment of pigs. Eds A Piva, K Bach Knudsen and JE. Lindberg Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, UK, 201– 218. Radcliffe JS, Zhang Z and Kornegay ET, 1998. The effects of microbial phytase, citric acid and their interaction in corn-soybean meal-based diet for weaning piglets. Journal of Animal Science, 76, 1880– 1886. Ravindran V and Kornegay E, 1993. Acidification of weaner pig diets: a review. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 62, 313– 322. Snow JL, Baker DH and Parsons CM, 2004. Phytase, citric acid, and 1α-hydroxycholecalciferol improve phytate phosphorus utilization in chicks fed a corn-soybean meal diet. Poultry Science, 83, 1187– 1192. Wright DE, 1971. Citric acid metabolism in the bovine rumen. Applied Microbiology, 21, 165– 168. Citing Literature Volume13, Issue2February 20154009 ReferencesRelatedInformation
Referência(s)