The DOI matches its Crossref record; 115 of the 115 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scientific Opinion on the maintenance of the list of QPS biological agents intentionally added to food and feed (2013 update)
Open accessAbstract
EFSA is requested to assess the safety of a broad range of biological agents in the context of notifications for market authorisation as sources of food and feed additives, enzymes and plant protection products. The qualified presumption of safety (QPS) assessment was developed to provide a harmonised generic pre-assessment to support safety risk assessments performed by EFSA's scientific Panels. The safety of unambiguously defined biological agents (at the highest taxonomic unit appropriate for the purpose for which an application is intended), and the completeness of the body of knowledge are assessed. Identified safety concerns for a taxonomic unit are, where possible and reasonable in number, reflected as ‘qualifications’ in connection with a recommendation for a QPS status. The list of QPS recommended biological agents is reviewed and updated periodically. Therefore, the only valid list is the one in the most recently published scientific opinion. The 2013 update reviews previously assessed microorganisms including bacteria, yeasts, filamentous fungi, oomycetes and viruses used for plant protection purposes. All taxonomic units previously recommended for the QPS list had their status reconfirmed. The new notifications since the last QPS update were reviewed. Gluconobacter oxydans and Alphaflexiviridae were assessed for the first time and were recommended for the QPS list. The information of the previous opinion was updated for the taxonomic units on the QPS list. Qualifications for the taxonomic units included in the QPS recommended list were reviewed and confirmed. Filamentous fungi and enterococci were not recommended for the QPS list following updating and reviewing of current scientific knowledge.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sipuleucel-T Immunotherapy for Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer
Kantoff, P. W., Higano, C. S., Shore, N. D., Berger, E. R., Small, E. J., Penson, D. F., Redfern, C. H., Ferrari, A. C., Dreicer, R., Sims, R. B., et al. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1001294 · Cited by 5,572
Schoch, C. L., Seifert, K. A., Huhndorf, S., Robert, V., Spouge, J. L., Levesque, C. A., Chen, W., Fungal Barcoding Consortium, Fungal Barcoding Consortium Author List, Bolchacova, E., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1117018109 · Cited by 5,120
Kurtzman, C. P., & Lodder, J. (1972) · Mycologia · doi:10.2307/3758036 · Cited by 3,081
Martinez, D., Berka, R. M., Henrissat, B., Saloheimo, M., Arvas, M., Baker, S. E., Chapman, J., Chertkov, O., Coutinho, P. M., Cullen, D., et al. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1403 · Cited by 1,240
Expression of animal virus genomes
Baltimore, D. (1971) · Bacteriological Reviews · doi:10.1128/br.35.3.235-241.1971 · Cited by 923
(FEEDAP), E. P. O. A. A. P. O. S. U. I. A. F. (2012) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2740 · Cited by 904
Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcal Infections
Murray, B. E. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200003093421007 · Cited by 890
Intrinsic and acquired resistance mechanisms in enterococcus
Hollenbeck, B. L., & Rice, L. B. (2012) · Virulence · doi:10.4161/viru.21282 · Cited by 795
Food fermentations: Microorganisms with technological beneficial use
Bourdichon, F., Casaregola, S., Farrokh, C., Frisvad, J. C., Gerds, M. L., Hammes, W. P., Harnett, J., Huys, G., Laulund, S., Ouwehand, A., et al. (2012) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.12.030 · Cited by 742
Gao, P., Mao, D., Luo, Y., Wang, L., Xu, B., & Xu, L. (2012) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2012.02.004 · Cited by 680
Cited by
Antibiotic resistance in probiotic bacteria
Gueimonde, M., Sánchez, B., G. de los Reyes-Gavilán, C., & Margolles, A. (2013) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2013.00202 · Cited by 691
Lactic acid bacteria as starter cultures: An update in their metabolism and genetics
Bintsis, T., & Department of Agricultural Technology, T. O. W. M. (2018) · AIMS Microbiology · doi:10.3934/microbiol.2018.4.665 · Cited by 570
(BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H., Koutsoumanis, K., Allende, A., Alvarez‐Ordóñez, A., Bolton, D., Bover‐Cid, S., Chemaly, M., Davies, R., De Cesare, A., Hilbert, F., et al. (2021) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6377 · Cited by 445
Self-citation(BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H., Koutsoumanis, K., Allende, A., Alvarez‐Ordóñez, A., Bolton, D., Bover‐Cid, S., Chemaly, M., Davies, R., De Cesare, A., Hilbert, F., et al. (2020) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5966 · Cited by 294
Self-citationFilamentous fungi and mycotoxins in cheese: A review
Hymery, N., Vasseur, V., Coton, M., Mounier, J., Jany, J., Barbier, G., & Coton, E. (2014) · Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety · doi:10.1111/1541-4337.12069 · Cited by 215
Metadata
- Authors
- (BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H.
- Venue
- EFSA Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 11
- ISSN
- 1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2609913348
- Cited by
- 328
- References
- 115
- FWCI
- 66.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Scientific Opinion on the maintenance of the list of QPS biological agents intentionally added to food and feed (2013 update). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3449
- The paper
- (BIOHAZ), E. P. O. B. H. (2013). Scientific Opinion on the maintenance of the list of QPS biological agents intentionally added to food and feed (2013 update). EFSA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2013.3449
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
