An experiment was performed using 18 dairy cows with 2 2 lactations from parturition until week 20 of lactation to investigate the effects of feeding rumen-protected crystalline fat (group A) or free fatty acids (group B) compared with a control group not fed supplementd fat or fatty acids (group C). The feeding effects studied were those on milk yield and composition, body weight (By, body conditions scores (BCS), skinfold values (a measure of subcutaneous fat tissue thickness), backfat thickness and longissimus dorsi muscle diameter (measured by ultrasound), as well as on blood plasma metabolic and endocrine traits. Fat and fatty-acid feeding reduced roughage intake. Net energy and protein balances during the first week of lactation were negative. Milk yield was sirmlar in all groups, but concentrations of milk fat were reduced in group B and of milk protein i n groups A and B. BW, BCS, skinfold value, backfat thickness and longissimus dorsi musde diameter similarly decreased in all groups until weeks 8-12.Concentrations of glucose and fructosamine decreased transiently during early lactation, whereas levels of /3-hydroxybutyrate, urea, total protein and albumin increased reversibly and similarly in all groups. Concentrations of creatinine decreased similarly in all groups until week 4 and those of nonesterified fatty acids until week 12. Triglyceride concentrations increased continuously unul week 18, whereas concentrations of phospholipid and cholesterol increased until week 10 and then remained elevated. Triglyceride, phospholipid and cholesterol concentrations were higher in group B than in groups A and C throughout the experiment. Concentrations of insulin, insulin-like growth factor-1, thyroxine and 3,5,3'triiodothyronine started to increase after the first 6-8 weeks of lactation, while those of growth hormone were transiently low in week 16. None of the hormones exhibited group differences. In this study rumenprotected fat or fatty-acid supplementation failed to improve the energy and protein balances during early lactation and did not affect milk yield, likely due to decreased roughage intake. BCS, skinfold values and backfat ultrasound measurements of subcutaneous adipose tissue mass and of longissimus dorsi muscle diameter indicated mobilization of fat tissue and protein mobilization in early lactation and were mirrored by typical changes of metabolic and endocrine traits.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA 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 oct‐1‐en‐3‐ol [02.023], pent‐1‐en‐3‐ol [02.099], oct‐1‐en‐3‐one [07.081], oct‐1‐en‐3‐yl acetate [09.281], isopulegol [02.067] and 5‐methylhept‐2‐en‐4‐one [07.139], belonging to chemical group 5, and of isopulegone [07.067] and α‐damascone [07.134] belonging to chemical group 8, when used as feed flavourings for all animal species. They are currently authorised for use as flavours in food. The FEEDAP Panel was unable to assess the safety of isopulegone because the purity of the compound could not be established and the safety of α‐damascone [07.134] because of the inconclusive assessment of its genotoxicity. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of isopulegol [02.067] is safe at the maximum proposed dose of 5 mg/kg complete feed for all animal species, except cats for which the use level of 1 mg/kg is considered safe. 5‐Methylhept‐2‐en‐4‐one [07.139] is safe at the proposed normal use levels of 1 mg/kg complete feed for all animal species. For oct‐1‐en‐3‐ol [02.023], pent‐1‐en‐3‐ol [02.099], oct‐1‐en‐3‐one [07.081] and oct‐1‐en‐3‐yl acetate [09.281], the calculated safe use level is 1 mg/kg complete feed for all animal species, except cats for which the calculated safe level is 0.6 mg/kg. No safety concern would arise for the consumer from the use of these compounds up to the highest safe levels in feed. In the absence of studies to assess the safety for the user, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the users when handling the additives. Use of the compounds in animal feed at the maximum safe level is considered safe for the environment. Since the compounds are used in food as flavourings and their function in feed is essentially the same, no demonstration of efficacy is necessary.

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of Bacillus subtilis PB6, the extension of use to ornamental, sporting and game birds and a modification on the concentration of the said additive. The product under assessment is based on viable spores of a strain originally identified as Bacillus subtilis. During the course of the current assessment, the active agent has been redesignated as Bacillus velezensis ATCC PTA-6737. The bacterial species B. velezensis is considered suitable for the qualified presumption of safety (QPS) approach to safety assessment. The identity of the active agent is established and the compliance with the other qualifications confirmed. Therefore, B. velezensis ATCC PTA-6737 is presumed safe for the target species, consumers of products derived from animals fed the additive and the environment. The additive is not a dermal/eye irritant or a skin sensitiser. Exposure via inhalation is unlikely. In the previous assessments performed by the FEEDAP Panel, the additive showed to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive in feedingstuffs for chickens for fattening and chickens reared for laying at the level of 1 9 10 7 CFU/kg. Considering that efficacy at the same level has been shown, this conclusion is extrapolated to ornamental, sporting and gaming birds.