originator reference product  (Sandoz)

Journal: Letters in applied microbiology

Article Title: Detection of tabtoxin-producing strains of Pseudomonas syringae by PCR.

doi: 10.1046/j.1472-765x.2001.00882.x

Figure Lengend Snippet: Fig. 1 PCR reactions with tblA and tabA primers. Tab + and Tab ) in parentheses indicate that the culture produced or did not produce, respectively, tabtoxin as indicated by the Escherichia coli bioassay. Lanes: M, DNA molecular weight marker; 1: Pseudomonas syringae BR2R (Tab +); 2: E. coli DH5a(pRTBL823) (Tab +); 3: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ICMP 2835 (Tab )); 4: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci PDDCC 2835 (Tab +); 5: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci 15D41 (Tab +); 6: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci 113R (Tab +); 7: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci PDDCC 4410 (Tab +); 8: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ATCC 11528 (Tab +); 9: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ICMP 12192 (Tab +); 10: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ATCC 15373 (Tab +); 11: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ATCC 17914 (Tab +); 12: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci ATCC 27881 (Tab +); 13: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci MD 340a (Tab +); 14: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci `angulata' ATCC 13453 (Tab )); 15: Ps. syringae pv. tabaci `angulata' 31D41 (Tab )); 16: Ps. savastanoi pv. phaseolicola NPS3121 (Tab )); 17: Ps. syringae BR11á000 (Tab )); 18: E. coli DH5a (Tab )); 19: Ps. syringae pv. coronafaciens ICMP 3113 (Tab )); 20: Ps. syringae pv. coronafaciens ICMP 4421 (Tab )); 21: Ps. syringae pv. coronafaciens 10052 (Tab +); 22: Ps. syringae pv. coronafaciens T1 (Tab +); 23: Ps. syringae pv. coronafaciens PC27R (Tab +); 24: Ps. syringae pv. garcae ICMP 2710 (Tab +); 25: Ps. syringae pv. garcae ICMP 4323 (Tab )); 26: Ps. syringae pv. garcae ATCC 19864 (Tab +); 27: Ps. syringae pv. garcae ICMP 5802 (Tab +); 28: Ps. syringae pv. garcae 5802±77 (Tab )); 29: Ps. syringae pv. garcae ICMP 8047 (Tab )); 30: Ps. savastanoi pv. glycinea PG4180.N9 (Tab )); 31: Ps. syringae pv. tomato PT23 (Tab )); 32: Ps. syringae pv. syringae 61 (Tab )); 33: Ps. syringae pv. syringae B301D (Tab )); 34: Ps. syringae pv. tagetis 1±1332a (Tab )); 35: Ps. syringae 3366 (Tab )); and 36: Ps. syringae 8±1 (Tab ))

Article Snippet: Host (common name), toxin produced Toxin production Glutamine reversible PCR product tblA tabA Origin/reference Escherichia coli DH5_ Ð ± * ± ± Promega E. coli DH5a(pRTBL823) Ð ± + + Kinscherf et al. 1991 Pseudomonas aureofaciens 13985 Ð + Nà ± ± ATCC§ Ps.

Techniques: Produced, Bioassay, Molecular Weight, Marker

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques:

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of Codex MRL proposals derived by JMPR and EU MRLs

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of the residue definitions derived by JMPR and at EU level

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay, Marker

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of Codex MRL proposals derived by JMPR and EU MRLs

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay, Concentration Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of Codex MRL proposals derived by JMPR and EU MRLs

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques:

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of Codex MRL proposals derived by JMPR and EU MRLs

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay, Sampling

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of Codex MRL proposals derived by JMPR and EU MRLs

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay, Modification, Concentration Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques:

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay

Journal: EFSA Journal

Article Title: Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 51st Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues ( CCPR )

doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2019.5797

Figure Lengend Snippet: Summary of the consumer risk assessment

Article Snippet: RA assumptions: An indicative short‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs. The HRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (cane fruits, grapes) compared to the HRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ARfD was used , RA assumptions: An indicative long‐term risk assessment was performed with the products of plant origin for which Codex proposed higher MRLs compared to the existing EU MRLs, and the existing MRL values in Reg 396/2005 The STMRs derived for raw agricultural commodities by JMPR refer to the avermectin B1a component only and were used if higher in absolute value (grapes) compared to the STMRs derived based on the EU use according with the EU residue definition for risk assessment. A conversion factor for risk assessment of 1.25 was used for the MRLs on products of animal origin set in the regulation above the LOQ The risk assessment is indicative because information on the residue concentration in accordance with the EU risk assessment residue definition is not available for the crops assessed by JMPR The EU ADI was used , Specific comments: Consumer exposure considering residues of avermectin B1a only.

Techniques: Derivative Assay