Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance Clonostachys rosea strain J1446 (approved in Regulation (EU) No 540/2011 as Gliocladium catenulatum strain J1446)

Microbial Biocontrol as an Alternative to Synthetic Fungicides: Boundaries between Pre- and Postharvest Applications on Vegetables and Fruits

From a ‘farm to fork’ perspective, there are several phases in the production chain of fruits and vegetables in which undesired microbial contaminations can attack foodstuff. In managing these diseases, harvest is a crucial point for shifting the intervention criteria. While in preharvest, pest management consists of tailored agricultural practices, in postharvest, the contaminations are treated using specific (bio)technological approaches (physical, chemical, biological). Some issues connect the ‘pre’ and ‘post’, aligning some problems and possible solution. The colonisation of undesired microorganisms in preharvest can affect the postharvest quality, influencing crop production, yield and storage. Postharvest practices can ‘amplify’ the contamination, favouring microbial spread and provoking injures of the product, which can sustain microbial growth. In this context, microbial biocontrol is a biological strategy receiving increasing interest as sustainable innovation. Microbial-based biotools can find application both to control plant diseases and to reduce contaminations on the product, and therefore, can be considered biocontrol solutions in preharvest or in postharvest. Numerous microbial antagonists (fungi, yeasts and bacteria) can be used in the field and during storage, as reported by laboratory and industrial-scale studies. This review aims to examine the main microbial-based tools potentially representing sustainable bioprotective biotechnologies, focusing on the biotools that overtake the boundaries between pre- and postharvest applications protecting quality against microbial decay.

Pesticide active substances that do not require a review of the existing maximum residue levels under Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005

Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 establishes the rules governing the setting and the review of pesticide maximum residue levels (MRLs) at European level. According to Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA shall provide within 12 months from the date of the inclusion or non-inclusion of an active substance in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC a reasoned opinion on the review of the existing MRLs for that active substance. Article 12(2) of that Regulation stipulates that EFSA shall provide by 1 September 2009 a reasoned opinion on the review of the existing MRLs for all active substances included in Annex I to Directive 91/414/EEC before 2 September 2008. Among the active substances that need to be reviewed under Article 12(1) or Article 12(2) of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, EFSA identified 12 active substances for which a review of MRLs is no longer considered necessary, including five active substances that were already included temporarily in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 by risk managers pending finalisation of their evaluation under Directive 91/414/EEC or Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and pending submission of EFSA's reasoned opinion in accordance with Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005. EFSA prepared a statement explaining the reasons why a review of MRLs for these substances became obsolete. The relevant question numbers are considered addressed by this statement.