Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance potassium hydrogen carbonate

Natural products for biocontrol: review of their fate in the environment and impacts on biodiversity

Biocontrol solutions (macroorganisms, microorganisms, natural substances, semiochemicals) are presented as potential alternatives to conventional plant protection products (PPPs) because they are supposed to have lower impacts on ecosystems and human health. However, to ensure the sustainability of biocontrol solutions, it is necessary to document the unintended effects of their use. Thus, the objectives of this work were to review (1) the available biocontrol solutions and their regulation, (2) the contamination of the environment (soil, water, air) by biocontrol solutions, (3) the fate of biocontrol solutions in the environment, (4) their ecotoxicological impacts on biodiversity, and (5) the impacts of biocontrol solutions compared to those of conventional PPPs. Very few studies concern the presence of biocontrol solutions in the environment, their fate, and their impacts on biodiversity. The most important number of results were found for the organisms that have been used the longest, and most often from the angle of their interactions with other biocontrol agents. However, the use of living organisms (microorganisms and macroorganisms) in biocontrol brings a specific dimension compared to conventional PPPs because they can survive, multiply, move, and colonize other environments. The questioning of regulation stems from this specific dimension of the use of living organisms. Concerning natural substances, the few existing results indicate that while most of them have low ecotoxicity, others have a toxicity equivalent to or greater than that of the conventional PPPs. There are almost no result regarding semiochemicals. Knowledge of the unintended effects of biocontrol solutions has proved to be very incomplete. Research remains necessary to ensure their sustainability.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Alvarez F, Arena M, Auteri D, Borroto J, Brancato A, Carrasco Cabrera L, Castoldi AF, Chiusolo A, Colagiorgi A, Colas M, Crivellente F, De Lentdecker C, Egsmose M, Fait G, Gouliarmou V, Ferilli F, Greco L, Ippolito A, Istace F, Jarrah S, Kardassi D, Kienzler A, Leuschner R, Lava R, Linguadoca A, Lythgo C, Magrans O, Mangas I, Miron I, Molnar T, Padovani L, Parra Morte JM, Pedersen R, Reich H, Santos M, Sharp R, Szentes C, Terron A, Tiramani M, Vagenende B, Villamar‐Bouza L. Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance clofentezine

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Spain, and co-rapporteur Member State, the Netherlands, for the pesticide active substance clofentezine and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of clofentezine as an acaricide on citrus, pome fruits, strawberry, tomatoes and aubergine. The peer review also provided considerations on whether exposure to humans and the environment from the representative uses of clofentezine can be considered negligible, taking into account the European Commission's draft guidance on this topic. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified. An evaluation of data concerning the necessity of clofentezine as acaricide to control a serious danger to plant health which cannot be contained by other available means, including non-chemical methods is also presented.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Alvarez F, Arena M, Auteri D, Borroto J, Brancato A, Carrasco Cabrera L, Castoldi AF, Chiusolo A, Colagiorgi A, Colas M, Crivellente F, De Lentdecker C, Egsmose M, Fait G, Gouliarmou V, Ferilli F, Greco L, Ippolito A, Istace F, Jarrah S, Kardassi D, Kienzler A, Leuschner R, Lava R, Linguadoca A, Lythgo C, Magrans O, Mangas I, Miron I, Molnar T, Padovani L, Parra Morte JM, Pedersen R, Reich H, Santos M, Sharp R, Szentes C, Terron A, Tiramani M, Vagenende B, Villamar‐Bouza L. Updated peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance bifenazate

The conclusions of the EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Sweden, and co-rapporteur Member State, Italy, for the pesticide active substance bifenazate are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of bifenazate as an acaricide on strawberry, fruiting vegetables (tomatoes, peppers, aubergines, cucumbers, courgettes, melons, watermelons), flowering and ornamental plants and nursery ornamentals and updated following the request to peer review the exposure and risk assessments for bifenazate. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.