Safety and efficacy of Pediococcus parvulus DSM 28875 as a silage additive for all animal species

technological additive, silage additive, Pediococcus parvulus, safety, QPS, efficacy
First published in the EFSA Journal
8 March 2017
24 January 2017
Scientific Opinion

The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a specific strain of Pediococcus parvulus when used as a technological additive intended to improve ensiling at a proposed application rate of 1 × 108 CFU/kg fresh matter. The species P. parvulus is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment and not to require specific demonstration of safety other than the absence of resistance to antibiotics of human and veterinary significance. As the identity of the strain was clearly established and as no antibiotic resistance was detected, the use of the strain in the production of silage is presumed safe for livestock species, consumers of products from animals fed treated silage and the environment. In the absence of data, no conclusion can be drawn on the skin and eye irritancy or skin sensitisation of the additive. The additive should be considered as a potential respiratory sensitiser. Five studies with laboratory-scale silos were made using forage of differing water-soluble carbohydrate content. Replicate silos containing forages treated at the proposed application rate were compared to identical silos containing the same but untreated forage. The minisilos were then stored for 90–103 days at 20–24°C. After opening, the contents of the silos were analysed. Results showed that Pediococcus parvulus DSM 28875 at 5 × 107 CFU/kg forage has the potential to improve the production of silage from easy and moderately difficult to ensile forage species by reducing dry matter loss and enhancing protein preservation.

Panel members at the time of adoption
Gabriele Aquilina, Giovanna Azimonti, Vasileios Bampidis, Maria de Lourdes Bastos, Georges Bories, Andrew Chesson, Pier Sandro Cocconcelli, Gerhard Flachowsky, Jürgen Gropp, Boris Kolar, Maryline Kouba, Marta López-Alonso, Secundino López Puente, Alberto Mantovani, Baltasar Mayo, Fernando Ramos, Guido Rychen, Maria Saarela, Roberto Edoardo Villa, Robert John Wallace and Pieter Wester.
Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed
feedap [at]
EFSA Journal 2017;15(3):4702 [9 pp.].
Question Number
On request from
European Commission
Competing interests
In line with EFSA's policy on declarations of interest, Panel member Baltasar Mayo, did not participate in the development and adoption of this scientific opinion.