DOCSLIB.ORG

B Commission Regulation (Eu)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
B Commission Regulation (Eu) 02010R0037 — EN — 29.09.2018 — 035.001 — 1 This text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. The Union's institutions do not assume any liability for its contents. The authentic versions of the relevant acts, including their preambles, are those published in the Official Journal of the European Union and available in EUR-Lex. Those official texts are directly accessible through the links embedded in this document ►B COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 37/2010 of 22 December 2009 on pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits in foodstuffs of animal origin (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ L 15, 20.1.2010, p. 1) Amended by: Official Journal No page date ►M1 Commission Regulation (EU) No 758/2010 of 24 August 2010 L 223 37 25.8.2010 ►M2 Commission Regulation (EU) No 759/2010 of 24 August 2010 L 223 39 25.8.2010 ►M3 Commission Regulation (EU) No 761/2010 of 25 August 2010 L 224 1 26.8.2010 ►M4 Commission Regulation (EU) No 890/2010 of 8 October 2010 L 266 1 9.10.2010 ►M5 Commission Regulation (EU) No 914/2010 of 12 October 2010 L 269 5 13.10.2010 ►M6 Commission Regulation (EU) No 362/2011 of 13 April 2011 L 100 26 14.4.2011 ►M7 Commission Regulation (EU) No 363/2011 of 13 April 2011 L 100 28 14.4.2011 ►M8 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 84/2012 of 1 L 30 1 2.2.2012 February 2012 ►M9 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 85/2012 of 1 L 30 4 2.2.2012 February 2012 ►M10 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 86/2012 of 1 L 30 6 2.2.2012 February 2012 ►M11 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 107/2012 of 8 L 36 25 9.2.2012 February 2012 ►M12 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 122/2012 of 13 L 40 2 14.2.2012 February 2012 ►M13 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 123/2012 of 13 L 40 4 14.2.2012 February 2012 ►M14 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 201/2012 of 8 L 71 37 9.3.2012 March 2012 ►M15 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 202/2012 of 8 L 71 40 9.3.2012 March 2012 ►M16 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 221/2012 of 14 L 75 7 15.3.2012 March 2012 ►M17 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 222/2012 of 14 L 75 10 15.3.2012 March 2012 ►M18 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 436/2012 of 23 L 134 10 24.5.2012 May 2012 ►M19 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 466/2012 of 1 L 143 2 2.6.2012 June 2012 ►M20 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1161/2012 of 7 L 336 14 8.12.2012 December 2012 02010R0037 — EN — 29.09.2018 — 035.001 — 2 ►M21 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1186/2012 of 11 L 338 20 12.12.2012 December 2012 ►M22 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1191/2012 of 12 L 340 35 13.12.2012 December 2012 ►M23 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 59/2013 of 23 L 21 21 24.1.2013 January 2013 ►M24 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 115/2013 of 8 L 38 11 9.2.2013 February 2013 ►M25 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 116/2013 of 8 L 38 14 9.2.2013 February 2013 ►M26 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 394/2013 of 29 L 118 17 30.4.2013 April 2013 ►M27 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 406/2013 of 2 L 121 42 3.5.2013 May 2013 ►M28 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 489/2013 of 27 L 141 4 28.5.2013 May 2013 ►M29 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1056/2013 of 29 L 288 60 30.10.2013 October 2013 ►M30 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1057/2013 of 29 L 288 63 30.10.2013 October 2013 ►M31 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1235/2013 of 2 L 322 21 3.12.2013 December 2013 ►M32 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 19/2014 of 10 L 8 18 11.1.2014 January 2014 ►M33 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 20/2014 of 10 L 8 20 11.1.2014 January 2014 ►M34 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 200/2014 of 3 L 62 8 4.3.2014 March 2014 ►M35 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 201/2014 of 3 L 62 10 4.3.2014 March 2014 ►M36 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 418/2014 of 24 L 124 19 25.4.2014 April 2014 ►M37 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 676/2014 of 19 L 180 5 20.6.2014 June 2014 ►M38 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 677/2014 of 19 L 180 8 20.6.2014 June 2014 ►M39 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 681/2014 of 20 L 182 11 21.6.2014 June 2014 ►M40 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 682/2014 of 20 L 182 14 21.6.2014 June 2014 ►M41 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 683/2014 of 20 L 182 17 21.6.2014 June 2014 ►M42 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 967/2014 of 12 L 272 3 13.9.2014 September 2014 ►M43 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1277/2014 of 1 L 346 23 2.12.2014 December 2014 ►M44 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1359/2014 of 18 L 365 103 19.12.2014 December 2014 ►M45 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1390/2014 of 19 L 369 65 24.12.2014 December 2014 ►M46 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/149 of 30 L 26 7 31.1.2015 January 2015 ►M47 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/150 of 30 L 26 10 31.1.2015 January 2015 ►M48 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/151 of 30 L 26 13 31.1.2015 January 2015 ►M49 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/152 of 30 L 26 16 31.1.2015 January 2015 02010R0037 — EN — 29.09.2018 — 035.001 — 3 ►M50 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/394 of 10 L 66 1 11.3.2015 March 2015 ►M51 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/446 of 17 L 74 18 18.3.2015 March 2015 ►M52 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1078 of 3 July 2015 L 175 5 4.7.2015 ►M53 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1079 of 3 July 2015 L 175 8 4.7.2015 ►M54 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1080 of 3 July 2015 L 175 11 4.7.2015 ►M55 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1308 of 29 July 2015 L 200 11 30.7.2015 ►M56 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1491 of 3 September L 231 7 4.9.2015 2015 ►M57 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1492 of 3 September L 231 10 4.9.2015 2015 ►M58 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1820 of 9 October L 265 1 10.10.2015 2015 ►M59 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2062 of 17 L 301 7 18.11.2015 November 2015 ►M60 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/129 of 1 February L 25 44 2.2.2016 2016 ►M61 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/305 of 3 March 2016 L 58 35 4.3.2016 ►M62 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/312 of 4 March 2016 L 60 3 5.3.2016 ►M63 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/576 of 14 April 2016 L 99 1 15.4.2016 ►M64 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/710 of 12 May 2016 L 125 6 13.5.2016 ►M65 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/885 of 3 June 2016 L 148 1 4.6.2016 ►M66 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1444 of 31 August L 235 8 1.9.2016 2016 ►M67 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1834 of 17 October L 280 22 18.10.2016 2016 ►M68 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2045 of 23 L 318 3 24.11.2016 November 2016 ►M69 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2074 of 25 L 320 29 26.11.2016 November 2016 ►M70 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/201 of 6 February L 32 17 7.2.2017 2017 ►M71 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1558 of 14 L 237 67 15.9.2017 September 2017 ►M72 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/1559 of 14 L 237 69 15.9.2017 September 2017 ►M73 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/520 of 28 March L 87 9 3.4.2018 2018 ►M74 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/523 of 28 March L 88 1 4.4.2018 2018 ►M75 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/721 of 16 May 2018 L 122 5 17.5.2018 ►M76 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/722 of 16 May 2018 L 122 8 17.5.2018 ►M77 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/1076 of 30 July 2018 L 194 41 31.7.2018 Corrected by: ►C1 Corrigendum, OJ L 293, 11.11.2010, p. 72 (37/2010) 02010R0037 — EN — 29.09.2018 — 035.001 — 4 ▼B COMMISSION REGULATION (EU) No 37/2010 of 22 December 2009 on pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits in foodstuffs of animal origin (Text with EEA relevance) Article 1 Pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits are set out in the Annex. Article 2 This Regulation shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 02010R0037 — EN — 29.09.2018 — 035.001 — 5 ▼B ANNEX Pharmacologically active substances and their classification regarding maximum residue limits (MRL) Table 1 Allowed substances Other Provisions (according to Pharmacologically Therapeutic Marker residue Animal Species MRL Target Tissues Article 14(7) of active Substance Classification Regulation (EC) No 470/2009) Abamectin Avermectin B1a Bovine 10 μg/kg Fat NO ENTRY Antiparasitic agents/ 20 μg/kg Liver Agents acting against endo- and ectoparasites Ovine 20 μg/kg Muscle Not for use in 50 μg/kg Fat animals from which 25 μg/kg Liver milk is produced for 20 μg/kg Kidney human consumption.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Evaluation of Fluralaner and Afoxolaner Treatments to Control Flea
    Dryden et al. Parasites & Vectors (2016) 9:365 DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1654-7 RESEARCH Open Access Evaluation of fluralaner and afoxolaner treatments to control flea populations, reduce pruritus and minimize dermatologic lesions in naturally infested dogs in private residences in west central Florida USA Michael W. Dryden1*, Michael S. Canfield2, Kimberly Kalosy1, Amber Smith1, Lisa Crevoiserat1, Jennifer C. McGrady1, Kaitlin M. Foley1, Kathryn Green2, Chantelle Tebaldi2, Vicki Smith1, Tashina Bennett1, Kathleen Heaney3, Lisa Math3, Christine Royal3 and Fangshi Sun3 Abstract Background: A study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of two different oral flea and tick products to control flea infestations, reduce pruritus and minimize dermatologic lesions over a 12 week period on naturally infested dogs in west central FL USA. Methods: Thirty-four dogs with natural flea infestations living in 17 homes were treated once with a fluralaner chew on study day 0. Another 27 dogs living in 17 different homes were treated orally with an afoxolaner chewable on day 0, once between days 28–30 and once again between days 54–60. All products were administered according to label directions by study investigators. Flea populations on pets were assessed using visual area counts and premise flea infestations were assessed using intermittent-light flea traps on days 0, 7, 14, 21, and once between days 28–30, 40–45, 54–60 and 82–86. Dermatologic assessments were conducted on day 0 and once monthly. Pruritus assessments were conducted by owners throughout the study. No concurrent treatments for existing skin disease (antibiotics, anti-inflammatories, anti-fungals) were allowed.
    [Show full text]
  • Identification of Transcriptome and Fluralaner Responsive Genes in The
    Jia et al. BMC Genomics (2020) 21:120 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-020-6533-0 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Identification of transcriptome and fluralaner responsive genes in the common cutworm Spodoptera litura Fabricius, based on RNA-seq Zhong-Qiang Jia1, Di Liu1, Ying-Chuan Peng1,3, Zhao-Jun Han1, Chun-Qing Zhao1* and Tao Tang2* Abstract Background: Fluralaner is a novel isoxazoline insecticide with a unique action site on the γ-aminobutyric acid receptor (GABAR), shows excellent activity on agricultural pests including the common cutworm Spodoptera litura, and significantly influences the development and fecundity of S. litura at either lethal or sublethal doses. Herein, Illumina HiSeq Xten (IHX) platform was used to explore the transcriptome of S. litura and to identify genes responding to fluralaner exposure. Results: A total of 16,572 genes, including 451 newly identified genes, were observed in the S. litura transcriptome and annotated according to the COG, GO, KEGG and NR databases. These genes included 156 detoxification enzyme genes [107 cytochrome P450 enzymes (P450s), 30 glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) and 19 carboxylesterases (CarEs)] and 24 insecticide-targeted genes [5 ionotropic GABARs, 1 glutamate-gated chloride channel (GluCl), 2 voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSCs), 13 nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs), 2 acetylcholinesterases (AChEs) and 1 ryanodine receptor (RyR)]. There were 3275 and 2491 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in S. litura treated with LC30 or LC50 concentrations of fluralaner, respectively. Among the DEGs, 20 related to detoxification [16 P450s, 1 GST and 3 CarEs] and 5 were growth-related genes (1 chitin and 4 juvenile hormone synthesis genes).
    [Show full text]
  • Report Name:Ukraine's Mrls for Veterinary Drugs
    Voluntary Report – Voluntary - Public Distribution Date: November 05,2020 Report Number: UP2020-0051 Report Name: Ukraine's MRLs for Veterinary Drugs Country: Ukraine Post: Kyiv Report Category: FAIRS Subject Report Prepared By: Oleksandr Tarassevych Approved By: Robin Gray Report Highlights: Ukraine adopted several maximum residue levels (MRLs) for veterinary drugs, coccidiostats and histomonostats in food products of animal origin. Ukraine also adopted a list of drugs residues that are not allowed in food products. THIS REPORT CONTAINS ASSESSMENTS OF COMMODITY AND TRADE ISSUES MADE BY USDA STAFF AND NOT NECESSARILY STATEMENTS OF OFFICIAL U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICY The Office of Agricultural Affairs of USDA/Foreign Agricultural Service in Kyiv, Ukraine prepared this report for U.S. exporters of domestic food and agricultural products. While every possible care was taken in the preparation of this report, information provided may not be completely accurate either because policies have changed since the time this report was written, or because clear and consistent information about these policies was not available. It is highly recommended U.S. exporters verify the full set of import requirements with their foreign customers, who are normally best equipped to research such matters with local authorities, before any goods are shipped. This FAIRS Subject Report accompanies other reports on Maximum, Residue Limits established by Ukraine in 2020. Related reports could be found under the following links: 1.) Ukraine's MRLs for Microbiological Contaminants_Kyiv_Ukraine_04-27-2020 2.) Ukraine's MRLs for Certain Contaminants_Kyiv_Ukraine_03-06-2020 Food Products of animal origin and/or ingredients of animal origin are not permitted in the Ukrainian market if they contain certain veterinary drugs residues in excess of the maximum residue levels established in Tables 1 and 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Fully Automated Dried Blood Spot Sample Preparation Enables the Detection of Lower Molecular Mass Peptide and Non-Peptide Doping Agents by Means of LC-HRMS
    Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry (2020) 412:3765–3777 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-020-02634-4 RESEARCH PAPER Fully automated dried blood spot sample preparation enables the detection of lower molecular mass peptide and non-peptide doping agents by means of LC-HRMS Tobias Lange1 & Andreas Thomas1 & Katja Walpurgis1 & Mario Thevis1,2 Received: 10 December 2019 /Revised: 26 March 2020 /Accepted: 31 March 2020 # The Author(s) 2020 Abstract The added value of dried blood spot (DBS) samples complementing the information obtained from commonly routine doping control matrices is continuously increasing in sports drug testing. In this project, a robotic-assisted non-destructive hematocrit measurement from dried blood spots by near-infrared spectroscopy followed by a fully automated sample preparation including strong cation exchange solid-phase extraction and evaporation enabled the detection of 46 lower molecular mass (< 2 kDa) peptide and non-peptide drugs and drug candidates by means of LC-HRMS. The target analytes included, amongst others, agonists of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor, the ghrelin receptor, the human growth hormone receptor, and the antidiuretic hormone receptor. Furthermore, several glycine derivatives of growth hormone–releasing peptides (GHRPs), argu- ably designed to undermine current anti-doping testing approaches, were implemented to the presented detection method. The initial testing assay was validated according to the World Anti-Doping Agency guidelines with estimated LODs between 0.5 and 20 ng/mL. As a proof of concept, authentic post-administration specimens containing GHRP-2 and GHRP-6 were successfully analyzed. Furthermore, DBS obtained from a sampling device operating with microneedles for blood collection from the upper arm were analyzed and the matrix was cross-validated for selected parameters.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Fluralaner As an Oral Acaricide to Reduce Tick Infestation
    Pelletier et al. Parasites Vectors (2020) 13:73 https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-020-3932-7 Parasites & Vectors RESEARCH Open Access Evaluation of furalaner as an oral acaricide to reduce tick infestation in a wild rodent reservoir of Lyme disease Jérôme Pelletier1,2,3*, Jean‑Philippe Rocheleau2,4, Cécile Aenishaenslin1,2,3, Francis Beaudry5, Gabrielle Dimitri Masson1,2, L. Robbin Lindsay6, Nicholas H. Ogden2,7, Catherine Bouchard2,7 and Patrick A. Leighton1,2,3 Abstract Background: Lyme disease (LD) is an increasing public health threat in temperate zones of the northern hemisphere, yet relatively few methods exist for reducing LD risk in endemic areas. Disrupting the LD transmission cycle in nature is a promising avenue for risk reduction. This experimental study evaluated the efcacy of furalaner, a recent oral aca‑ ricide with a long duration of efect in dogs, for killing Ixodes scapularis ticks in Peromyscus maniculatus mice, a known wildlife reservoir for Borrelia burgdorferi in nature. Methods: We assigned 87 mice to 3 furalaner treatment groups (50 mg/kg, 12.5 mg/kg and untreated control) administered as a single oral treatment. Mice were then infested with 20 Ixodes scapularis larvae at 2, 28 and 45 days post‑treatment and we measured efcacy as the proportion of infesting larvae that died within 48 h. At each infesta‑ tion, blood from 3 mice in each treatment group was tested to obtain furalaner plasma concentrations (C p). Results: Treatment with 50 mg/kg and 12.5 mg/kg furalaner killed 97% and 94% of infesting larvae 2 days post‑treat‑ ment, but no signifcant efect of treatment on feeding larvae was observed 28 and 45 days post‑treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Effects of Chemicals Used Against Salmon Lice
    STRANDBÚNAÐUR 2018 Grand Hótel Reykjavík, 19. – 20. mars 2018 Renée Katrin Bechmann Environmental effects of chemicals used against salmon lice 21 March 2018 In aquaculture, pesticides are used against parasitic salmon lice to protect the health of farmed and wild Atlantic salmon. - How can this use of pesticides as medicine affect our coastal marine environment? Economic consequences Costs billions for the aquaculture industry Salmon lice and the war against lice Environmental concequences Animal welfare for farmed and wild salmon How to get rid of lice Risk for reduced stocks of wild salmon Kill them with chemicals Animal welfare and overfishing of cleaner fish Use cleaner fish and other non-chemical methods Risk for non-target crustaceans, and the rest of Protect the salmon from lice in (semi-)closed cages the coastal ecosystem The perfect anti-salmon lice medicine Low toxicity to: Humans High toxicity to: Salmon lice Salmon = target crustaceans Must eat the chemical or swim in a solution Fast depuration after treatment of the fish The environment including non-target crustaceans Must die! Fast degradation Low bioavailability … and not develop resistance Low toxicity kg used per year (log scale) 100000000 10000000 1000000 100000 10000 1000 100 10 1 1981 salmon lice 1981 usedChemicals against 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 - 2010 2017 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 peroxide Hydrogen benzoate Emamectin Deltamethrin
    [Show full text]
  • Chemotherapeutants Against Salmon Lice Lepeophtheirus Salmonis – Screening of Efficacy
    Chemotherapeutants against salmon lice Lepeophtheirus salmonis – screening of efficacy Stian Mørch Aaen Thesis for the degree of Philosophiae Doctor Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Biosciences Norwegian University of Life Sciences Adamstuen 2016 1 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments 5 Acronyms/terminology 7 List of papers 8 Summary 9 Sammendrag 9 1 Introduction 11 1.1 Salmon farming in an international perspective; industrial challenges 11 1.2 Salmon lice 12 1.2.1 History and geographic distribution 12 1.2.2 Salmon lice life cycle 14 1.2.3 Pathology caused by salmon lice 16 1.2.4 Salmon lice cultivation in the lab 16 1.3 Approaches to combat sea lice 17 1.3.1 Medicinal interference: antiparasitic chemotherapeutants 17 1.3.2 Resistance in sea lice against chemotherapeutants 19 1.3.3 Non-medicinal intervention: examples 22 1.3.3.1 Physical barriers 23 1.3.3.2 Optical and acoustic control measures 23 1.3.3.3 Functional feeds, vaccine, breeding 24 1.3.3.4 Biological de-lousing: cleaner fish and freshwater 24 1.3.3.5 Physical removal 24 1.3.3.6 Fallowing and geographical zones 25 1.4 Rationale 25 2 Aims 26 3 Materials and methods 26 3.1 Materials 26 3.1.1 Salmon lice 26 3.1.2 Fish – Atlantic salmon 26 3.1.3 Water 27 3.1.3 Medicinal compounds 27 3.1.4 Dissolvents 29 3.2 Methods 29 3.2.1 Hatching assays with egg strings 29 3.2.2 Survival assays with nauplii 29 3.2.3 Bioassays with preadults 30 3.2.4 Statistical analysis 31 4 Summary of papers, I-IV 32 5 Discussion 35 5.1 Novel methods for medicine screening 35 5.2 Industrial innovation in aquaculture and pharmaceutical companies 35 5.3 Administration routes of medicinal compounds to fish 36 5.4 Mixing and bioavailability of medicinal products in seawater 37 5.5 Biochemical targets in L.
    [Show full text]
  • RPB 2-2020.Pub
    RESEARCH IN PIG BREEDING, 14, 2020 (2) WHICH HORMONES HELP TO OPTIMIZE PIGLET PRODUCTION? Wähner, M. Anhalt University of Applied sciences, Bernburg, Germany Abstract Sows are kept and piglet production nowadays generally according to the periodic group farrowing system with the use of artificial insemination. To this end, it is necessary to control the reproductive events in the sows. Their aim is to bring the sows in a group into heat almost at the same time so that they can be inseminated at the same time. This guarantees almost the same farrowing dates for the sows in a group. The most important measure in the sow group is at the end of the suckling period the date for the simultaneous weaning of the piglets from the sows. In order to support the synchronization of the reproductive processes in the sows in a group, the use of exogenous hormones in the respective cycle phases of the animals is recommended. In the article the hormones available for this (biotechnics) are presented with their effects. Reproductive hormones are differentiated according to their place of synthesis and their target organ. This includes the hypothalamus with the target organ pituitary gland (releasing hormone, GnRH), the anterior pituitary lobe with the gonads (gonadotropins, FSH, LH), the posterior pituitary lobe with the smooth muscles (oxytocin) and the sex steroids (prostaglandin) formed on the ovary (corpus luteum) call. As a tissue hormone, prostaglandin F2α is important with regard to its luteolytic effect. Finally, the environmentally relevant importance of hormone treatment in sows is discussed. Currently 10 to 15 percent of sows are treated with hormones.
    [Show full text]
  • Cover Memo Isoxazolines Inquires
    Name: Isoxazoline inquiries DATE:10/1/2018 This serves as the response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records regarding adverse event reports received for afoxolaner, fluralaner, lotilaner and sarolaner. A search of CVM’s Adverse Drug Event (ADE) database was performed on 10-01-2018. The search parameters were: Active ingredient(s): afoxolaner, fluralaner, lotilaner and sarolaner Reports received: From 09-04-2013 through 07-31-2018 Case type: Spontaneous ADE report Species: All Route of administration: All For each drug (active ingredient), we have provided the ‘CVM ADE Comprehensive Clinical Detail Report Listing’, which is a cumulative listing of adverse experiences in reports submitted to CVM. General Information about CVM’s ADE Database The primary purpose for maintaining the CVM ADE database is to provide an early warning or signaling system to CVM for adverse effects not detected during pre-market testing of FDA- approved animal drugs and for monitoring the performance of drugs not approved for use in animals. Information from these ADE reports is received and coded in an electronic FDA/CVM ADE database. CVM scientists use the ADE database to make decisions about product safety which may include changes to the label or other regulatory action. CVM’s ADE reporting system depends on detection and voluntary reporting of adverse clinical events by veterinarians and animal owners. The Center's ADE review process is complex, and for each report takes into consideration confounding factors such as: Dosage Concomitant drug use The medical and physical condition of animals at the time of treatment Environmental and management information Product defects Name: Isoxazoline inquiries DATE:10/1/2018 Extra-label (off label) uses The specifics of these complex factors cannot be addressed in the CVM ADE Comprehensive Clinical Detail Report Listing.
    [Show full text]
  • Preventing Unsafe Chemicals in Food Using Triple Quadrupole LC/MS
    WWW.FOODQUALITYANDSAFETY.COM You Are What You Eat Preventing Unsafe Chemicals In Food Using Triple Quadrupole LC/MS Sponsored by: Unbelievably Robust, Remarkably Versatile Trying to keep up with growing demands and challenges in the lab can be an overwhelming task. At Agilent, we are consistently innovating to help you meet those needs. We’ve taken the trusted 6470A LC/TQ and added some new features to this workhorse. The 6470B LC/TQ is enhanced to maximize productivity with new technology for reduced downtime. Now you don’t have to choose between rock-solid performance and flexibility. Visit www.agilent.com/chem/6470B © Agilent Technologies, Inc. 2021 Contents From The Editor www.foodqualityandsafety.com By Samara E. Kuehne esticide residues that remain in or on vegetables, 3 fruits, herbs, honey, oil, seeds, and food of animal From the Editor Porigin can pose major threats to human health and to the environment. Improperly used veterinary drugs BY SAMARA E. KUEHNE and antibiotics can accumulate in food derived from animals, which can also adversely affect consumers. 4 Additionally, mycotoxins, produced primarily by the As- pergillus, Penicillium, and Fusarium fungi, have the po- Comprehensive LC/MS/MS Workflow of tential to contaminate a variety of common foods, such Pesticide Residues in High Water, High Oil, as grains, nuts, cocoa, and milk, and present an ongoing and High Starch Sample Matrices Using the challenge to food safety all along the food chain. Agilent 6470 Triple Quadrupole LC/MS System Limiting exposure to these potentially life-threatening contaminants in food and animal feed is critically im- BY AIMEI ZOU, SASHANK PILLAI, PETER KORNAS, MELANIE SCHOBER, portant.
    [Show full text]
  • Accreditation No: 15028
    SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION - No. 15028 Page 1 of 4 ACCREDITATION NO: 15028 Eurofins Agroscience Testing Pty Ltd Chemical Testing Laboratory Unit F6, Building F 16 Mars Road LANE COVE NSW 2066 CONTACT: Ms K Ford PHONE: (02) 9900 8442 FAX: MOBILE: 0421 609 757 EMAIL: [email protected] WEB SITE: www.eurofins.com.au FACILITIES: Public testing service This facility complies with the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005 7.37 Plastics .11 Chemical analyses Analysis of polyethylene products listed as determination(s) by technique(s) using method(s) - Bifenthrin by GC using in-house AATM-P94 7.52 Residues and contaminants in foods and agricultural materials .02 Pesticides Analysis of animal feeds, animal tissues (fat, kidney, liver, muscle), cereals, fruit, grains, juices/juice concentrate, pasture, pulses, oil seeds, vegetables listed as determination(s) by technique(s) using method(s) - Fungicides: Azoxystrobin; benalaxyl; benomyl; bitertanol; boscalid; bupirimate; carbendazim; carboxin; cyproconazole; difenoconazole; dimethomorph; epoxiconazole; fenarimol; fenbuconazole; fenhexamid; fenpyroximate; fludioxinil; fluquinconazole; flusilazole; flutriafol; hexaconazole; imazilil; ipconazole; iprodione; kresoxim-methyl; mancozeb; maneb; metalaxyl; metiram; myclobutanil; oxadixyl; penconazole; procymidone; propiconazole; propineb; pyraclostrobin; tebuconazole; tetraconazole; thiabendazole; thiram; triadimefon; triadimenol; tridemorph; trifloxystrobin; vinclozolin; zineb; ziram Herbicides: Ametryn; atrazine; carfentrazone ethyl; clethodim; clomazone; clopyralid;
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Advances on Detection of Insecticides Using Optical Sensors
    sensors Review Recent Advances on Detection of Insecticides Using Optical Sensors Nurul Illya Muhamad Fauzi 1, Yap Wing Fen 1,2,*, Nur Alia Sheh Omar 1,2 and Hazwani Suhaila Hashim 2 1 Functional Devices Laboratory, Institute of Advanced Technology, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia; [email protected] (N.I.M.F.); [email protected] (N.A.S.O.) 2 Department of Physics, Faculty of Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Selangor, Malaysia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Insecticides are enormously important to industry requirements and market demands in agriculture. Despite their usefulness, these insecticides can pose a dangerous risk to the safety of food, environment and all living things through various mechanisms of action. Concern about the environmental impact of repeated use of insecticides has prompted many researchers to develop rapid, economical, uncomplicated and user-friendly analytical method for the detection of insecticides. In this regards, optical sensors are considered as favorable methods for insecticides analysis because of their special features including rapid detection time, low cost, easy to use and high selectivity and sensitivity. In this review, current progresses of incorporation between recognition elements and optical sensors for insecticide detection are discussed and evaluated well, by categorizing it based on insecticide chemical classes, including the range of detection and limit of detection. Additionally, this review aims to provide powerful insights to researchers for the future development of optical sensors in the detection of insecticides. Citation: Fauzi, N.I.M.; Fen, Y.W.; Omar, N.A.S.; Hashim, H.S. Recent Keywords: insecticides; optical sensor; recognition element Advances on Detection of Insecticides Using Optical Sensors.
    [Show full text]