EFSA Journal (Oct 2021)

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance Spodoptera exigua multicapsid nucleopolyhedrovirus (SeMNPV)

  • European Food Safety Authority (EFSA),
  • Fernando Alvarez,
  • Maria Arena,
  • Domenica Auteri,
  • Jorge Borroto,
  • Alba Brancato,
  • Luis Carrasco Cabrera,
  • Anna Federica Castoldi,
  • Arianna Chiusolo,
  • Angelo Colagiorgi,
  • Mathilde Colas,
  • Federica Crivellente,
  • Chloe De Lentdecker,
  • Mark Egsmose,
  • Gabriella Fait,
  • Varvara Gouliarmou,
  • Franco Ferilli,
  • Luna Greco,
  • Alessio Ippolito,
  • Frederique Istace,
  • Samira Jarrah,
  • Dimitra Kardassi,
  • Aude Kienzler,
  • Renata Leuschner,
  • Roberto Lava,
  • Alberto Linguadoca,
  • Christopher Lythgo,
  • Oriol Magrans,
  • Iris Mangas,
  • Ileana Miron,
  • Tunde Molnar,
  • Laura Padovani,
  • Juan Manuel Parra Morte,
  • Ragnor Pedersen,
  • Hermine Reich,
  • Miguel Santos,
  • Rachel Sharp,
  • Csaba Szentes,
  • Andrea Terron,
  • Manuela Tiramani,
  • Benedicte Vagenende,
  • Laura Villamar‐Bouza

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6848
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 10
pp. n/a – n/a

Abstract

Read online

Abstract The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, Spain, for the pesticide active substance Spodoptera exigua multicapsid nucleopolyhedrovirus and the considerations as regards the inclusion of the substance in Annex IV of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of Spodoptera exigua multicapsid nucleopolyhedrovirus as an insecticide on pepper and leafy vegetables (lettuce crops) (field, greenhouse and walk‐in tunnel uses). The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

Keywords