Key fact: EFSA's new fumonisin-esterase opinion was adopted on 21 August and published on 16 September 2026. Publication is not itself an authorisation.
What Changed This Week
On 16 September, EFSA published an assessment of a specific fumonisin-esterase preparation for all terrestrial animal species. The panel concluded that it had potential efficacy under the proposed conditions of use and reached favourable conclusions on target-animal safety. It also identified handling risks. These conclusions concern the assessed preparation, not every product marketed for mycotoxin control. EFSA scientific opinion
For ingredient buyers, the commercial significance is a reason to ask better questions, not to relax purchasing specifications. Keep three decisions separate: whether an incoming ingredient meets acceptance requirements, whether an additive is authorised for its intended use, and whether the proposed control programme is technically justified.
An Opinion and an Authorisation Are Different Documents
The European Commission explains that feed additives require authorisation following scientific evaluation before they may be placed on the market. Its register links to the relevant authorisation regulations. A favourable scientific assessment therefore should not be presented as proof that every proposed species, dose or application is already permitted. Commission authorisation framework
Commercial interpretation: When a supplier cites "EFSA approval," request the actual reference and ask whether it is an opinion or an authorisation. Have the responsible technical or regulatory person confirm the exact preparation, target species, conditions and current legal status before changing an approved formulation.
Record that verification in the purchasing file. A useful entry identifies the product, supporting document, review date and person who accepted the proposed use. Avoid relying on a presentation slide or a general statement that the enzyme category is recognised.
Keep Incoming-Lot Acceptance Independent
The earlier authorisation for this preparation provides an important example. Regulation (EU) 2024/2184 authorised specified uses in piglets and fattening pigs and explicitly required the feed to be already compliant with applicable Union mycotoxin rules. That provision is not permission to accept unsuitable material on the assumption that adding an enzyme will correct it. Regulation 2024/2184, Annex
Commercial interpretation: Maintain a distinct incoming-material decision. Ask for the lot identity, relevant analytical results, sampling information and intended end use. If the evidence is incomplete or a result conflicts with the agreed specification, hold the acceptance decision for technical review.
Do not automatically change a contractual limit because a supplier proposes an additional treatment. Any specification revision should have a documented rationale and formal approval. Keep commercial negotiations separate from the person responsible for determining whether the material is acceptable.
For recurring purchases, agree in advance what happens when a result is disputed: who arranges additional testing, how retained samples are identified, and who authorises release or rejection.
Ask for Evidence That Matches the Claim
EFSA describes mycotoxins as compounds produced by fungi, with crop contamination possible before or after harvest. Its guidance also emphasises good agricultural, storage and processing practices as part of control. An additive discussion should therefore sit within a wider prevention and monitoring programme. EFSA mycotoxins overview
Commercial interpretation: Require specificity. Which toxin is the proposed measure intended to address? What evidence supports the intended application? Which operating conditions must be maintained? Who will verify that those conditions are achieved?
Ask the supplier to distinguish measured findings from anticipated benefits. Do not turn a claim concerning fumonisins into a general assurance covering all mycotoxins. Likewise, avoid treating a successful result in one application as sufficient evidence for every ingredient or feeding situation.
For cereal-derived materials, request documentation for the actual commercial grade and lot. A generic certificate from another product or an earlier shipment should not become the basis for release simply because the material has a familiar trade name.
Include Handling and Implementation
The new opinion identifies the assessed additive as a skin and respiratory sensitiser. Animal-safety conclusions do not remove the need to protect people handling the preparation. EFSA opinion
Commercial interpretation: Before purchasing, involve the people responsible for storage, dosing and workplace safety. Request current handling instructions and establish who will check their suitability for the receiving operation. Where a premix supplier performs the incorporation, clarify which controls that supplier owns and which remain with the customer.
Give the implementation review a named owner. Purchasing should know when technical approval is complete, production should know what instructions apply, and quality staff should know which records demonstrate that the agreed process was followed.