Cited by 13Agricultural safety and regulationsFungal Plant Pathogen ControlPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance Metschnikowia fructicola NRRL Y‐27328

Open access
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Arena, Maria, Auteri, Domenica, Barmaz, Stefania, Bellisai, Giulia, Brancato, Alba, Brocca, Daniela, Bura, Laszlo, Byers, Harry, Chiusolo, Arianna, Court Marques, Daniele, Crivellente, Federica, De Lentdecker, Chloe, Egsmose, Mark, Erdos, Zoltan, Fait, Gabriella, Ferreira, Lucien, Goumenou, Marina, Greco, Luna, Ippolito, Alessio, Istace, Frederique, Jarrah, Samira, Kardassi, Dimitra, Leuschner, Renata, Lythgo, Christopher, Magrans, Jose Oriol, Medina, Paula, Miron, Ileana, Molnar, Tunde, Nougadere, Alexandre, Padovani, Laura, Parra Morte, Juan Manuel, Pedersen, Ragnor, Reich, Hermine, Sacchi, Angela, Santos, Miguel, Serafimova, Rositsa, Sharp, Rachel, Stanek, Alois, Streissl, Franz, Sturma, Juergen, Szentes, Csaba, Tarazona, Jose, Terron, Andrea, Theobald, Anne, Vagenende, Benedicte, Verani, Alessia, Villamar‐Bouza, Laura·2017·EFSA Journal

Abstract

The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authority of the rapporteur Member State, France, for the pesticide active substance Metschnikowia fructicola NRRL Y-27328 and the assessment of the application for inclusion in Annex IV of Regulation (EU) No 396/2005 are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of Metschnikowia fructicola NRRL Y-27328 as a fungicide on stone fruits, strawberries and grapes. The reliable endpoints, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.5084

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • M. fructicola NRRL Y-30752 is now pursued by Koppert Biological Systems and has recently been approved as a plant protection agent against fungal diseases in stone fruits, strawberries and grapes by EFSA.

    “the isolate is now pursued by Koppert Biological Systems and has recently been approved as a plant protection agent against fungal diseases in stone fruits, strawberries and grapes by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) (European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2015c, 2017).”

    From Biocontrol yeasts: mechanisms and applications (2019) · cites this paper as European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2017

    The Summary identifies Koppert B.V. as the applicant for approval, and “The active substance and the formulated product” lists proposed fungicide uses on stone fruits, strawberries and grapes. But the paper assesses strain NRRL Y-27328, not the claimed NRRL Y-30752, and reports a peer review of an application rather than EFSA approval; “Concerns > Issues that could not be finalised” says parts of the risk assessment remained unresolved. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 3 · Cited by 13

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. EFSA, 2011, Submission of scientific peer‐reviewed open literature for the approval of pesticide active substances under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, EFSA Journal, 9, 2092

Metadata

Authors
(EFSA), E. F. S. A., Arena, M., Auteri, D., Barmaz, S., Bellisai, G., Brancato, A., Brocca, D., Bura, L., Byers, H., Chiusolo, A., Court Marques, D., Crivellente, F., De Lentdecker, C., Egsmose, M., Erdos, Z., Fait, G., Ferreira, L., Goumenou, M., Greco, L., Ippolito, A., Istace, F., Jarrah, S., Kardassi, D., Leuschner, R., Lythgo, C., Magrans, J. O., Medina, P., Miron, I., Molnar, T., Nougadere, A., Padovani, L., Parra Morte, J. M., Pedersen, R., Reich, H., Sacchi, A., Santos, M., Serafimova, R., Sharp, R., Stanek, A., Streissl, F., Sturma, J., Szentes, C., Tarazona, J., Terron, A., Theobald, A., Vagenende, B., Verani, A., & Villamar‐Bouza, L.
Venue
EFSA Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-12
Volume
15
Issue
12
Pages
e05084-e05084
ISSN
1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2773951385
Cited by
13
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 1
Type
peer review
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nd
Locations
  • EFSA Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Fungal Plant Pathogen Control
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Keywords
biofungicides, stone fruit, strawberry, grapes, pesticide risk assessment, representative uses, missing information

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