EFSA Journal (Jul 2025)

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance maleic hydrazide

  • European Food Safety Authority (EFSA),
  • Sofia Batista Leite,
  • Marco Binaglia,
  • Marija Blazevic,
  • Anna Federica Castoldi,
  • Arianna Chiusolo,
  • Angelo Colagiorgi,
  • Mathilde Colas,
  • Federica Crivellente,
  • Chloe De Lentdecker,
  • Isabella De Magistris,
  • Monica Fittipaldi Broussard,
  • German Giner Santonja,
  • Varvara Gouliarmou,
  • Katrin Halling,
  • Frederique Istace,
  • Samira Jarrah,
  • Dimitra Kardassi,
  • Anna Lanzoni,
  • Renata Leuschner,
  • Jochem Louisse,
  • Oriol Magrans,
  • Iris Mangas,
  • Andrea Mioč,
  • Ileana Miron,
  • Tunde Molnar,
  • Martina Panzarea,
  • Juan Manuel Parra Morte,
  • Miguel Santos,
  • Rositsa Serafimova,
  • Anne Theobald,
  • Manuela Tiramani,
  • Giorgia Vianello,
  • Laura Villamar‐Bouza

DOI
https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2025.9522
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 23, no. 7
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 assessment carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State Belgium for the pesticide active substance maleic hydrazide 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 for an amendment in approval conditions. The purpose of this application was to lift the precaution to Member States to ensure, where appropriate, that the label of the treated crops includes the indication that the crops were treated with maleic hydrazide and the accompanying instructions to avoid exposure of the livestock. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of maleic hydrazide as a plant growth regulator on onion, shallot, garlic, potato and carrot. A modification of existing maximum residue level (MRLs) for animal commodities is recommended. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Endpoints not relevant to the scope of the proposed amendment of approval conditions have not been addressed under this process. No additional missing information as required by the regulatory framework was identified in the scope of this review. No concerns were identified in the scope of this review.

Keywords