Abstract The objective of this opinion was to determine if any wild caught fish species, originating from specific fishing grounds and consumed in the EU/EFTA could be considered free of zoonotic parasites. In this Opinion the term 'fishery products' only refers to fresh finfish. As there are multiple fish species and numerous potential parasites, Anisakis sp. was used as an indicator of zoonotic parasites in marine areas. This parasite species is particularly suited as it is common in marine environments, capable of infecting multiple fish species and is the subject of the majority of published studies. On the rare occasion where Anisakis sp. data were not available, or all tests were negative, other parasites such as Contracaecum osculatum (s.l.) and/or Phocanema spp. were considered. In freshwater systems, all zoonotic parasites were investigated. Consumption, import and landing data were used to determine the most relevant fish species and, where possible, the source fishing areas were identified. The most commonly consumed wild caught fish species in the EU/EFTA include tuna, cod, Alaskan pollock, hake, herring, sardines, mackerel, trout and saithe. Although the majority of these fish are caught in the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean and the Black Sea (37) as well as several areas in the Indian Ocean, imported fish may originate from any global fishing areas, with the exception of Antarctica. Based on the data, at least one zoonotic parasite has been reported in at least one fish species in each of the FAO marine fishing areas. Thus, due to relative low fish host specificity of the zoonotic parasites, the panel concluded that all wild caught fish species may be exposed to and infected with zoonotic parasites. The same applies to freshwater fishing areas, with many areas having multiple studies reporting the presence of zoonotic parasites in the wild caught fish species.
The aim of this study was to examine the use of antioxidants on the oxidative stability of poultry offal oil used in the pet food industry. Five commercial synthetic and two natural antioxidants were used in the following treatments: Control (CON); CON + (BHT + BHA + ETH95); CON + (BHT + BHA); CON + (BHA + PG + CA); CON + (BHT + BHA + ETH70); CON + BHA; CON + (ASC + rosemary); and CON + (ASC + tocopherols). Inclusion levels were 0.5% for the synthetic and 0.625% for the natural antioxidants. Oxidative stability was determined at three temperatures (90, 110 and 130 ºC). To determine the fatty acid profile, the original sample of the offal oil was considered a negative control. The fatty acids were determined based on the preparation of methyl esters by a transesterification reaction with methanol in alkaline medium, followed by gas chromatography analysis. The different fatty acid types were identified by comparing the retention times of the fatty acid methyl ester standards with the retention times of the observed peaks. Compositional data analysis was carried out. Without the use of antioxidant, induction time is shorter, resulting in lower oxidative stability of the offal oil and consequent loss of its quality due to less time taken to oxidize. The antioxidants used in CON + (BHT + BHA + ETH95), CON + (BHA + PG + CA) and CON + BHA better preserved the essential fatty acids (linolenic and linoleic). Natural antioxidants exhibited higher oxidation, with higher proportions of saturated fatty acids and the worst ω6:ω3 ratios. In conclusion, the synthetic antioxidants used in CON + (BHT + BHA + ETH95), CON + (BHA + PG + CA) and CON + BHA provided greater protection against oxidation and better preserved the essential fatty acids. The natural antioxidants tested in the present study did not provide satisfactory protection.
