Modification of the existing maximum residue levels for fluroxypyr in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers

Abstract

In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the applicant Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaftund Gartenbau (LLG) submitted two applications to the competent national authority in Germany to modify the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the active substance fluroxypyr in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers. The data submitted in support of the request were found to be sufficient to derive MRL proposals for the commodities under consideration, except for thyme for which a tentative MRL proposal was derived for further risk management considerations. Adequate analytical methods for enforcement are available to control the residues of fluroxypyr in the commodities under consideration at the validated limit of quantification (LOQ) of 0.01 mg/kg. Based on the risk assessment results, EFSA concluded that the intake of residues resulting from the use of fluroxypyr according to the reported agricultural practices is unlikely to present a risk to consumer health.

Summary

In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Gartenbau (LLG) submitted two applications to the competent national authority in Germany (evaluating Member State, EMS) to modify the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the active substance fluroxypyr in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers. The EMS drafted two evaluation reports in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, which were submitted to the European Commission and forwarded to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 8 March 2017 and 18 March 2020. To accommodate for the intended uses of fluroxypyr, the EMS proposed to raise the existing MRLs from the limit of quantification (LOQ) 0.02* to 0.4 mg/kg for chives, from 0.05 to 2 mg/kg for thyme and from the LOQ 0.02* to 0.3 mg/kg for basil, parsley and celery leaves. EFSA assessed the applications and the evaluation reports as required by Article 10 of the MRL regulation. As regards the first application, related to chives and thyme, EFSA requested additional information on the analytical method for high water content commodities. Other points were identified in both dossiers which needed further clarification. On 10 August 2020, the EMS submitted revised evaluation reports, which replaced the previously submitted evaluation reports.

Based on the conclusions derived by EFSA in the framework of the pesticides peer review under Directive 91/414/EEC, the data evaluated under the MRL review, the evaluation of confirmatory data following the MRL review and the additional data provided by the EMS in the framework of the present MRL applications, the following conclusions are derived.

The metabolism of fluroxypyr (mepty and butoxypropyl ester) following foliar application in primary crops has been investigated and found to be similar in wheat and in onion (shoots and bulbs). Although for leafy crops, no specific metabolism study was available, there was sufficient evidence to assume that the metabolic behaviour is comparable with the crops for which the metabolism was investigated. Hence, the lack of metabolism study in minor leafy crops was considered a minor deviation. This would be in line with the previous risk management decision to set MRLs for fluroxypyr in the minor leafy crops thyme and herbal infusions from flowers without requesting confirmatory data on primary crop metabolism. For future applications to set MRLs on leafy crops, the data gap for a representative metabolism study covering foliar treatment on leafy vegetables needs to be addressed.

Standard hydrolysis studies investigating the stability of the active substance under conditions representative for pasteurisation, boiling/cooking and sterilisation are not available. The commodities under consideration are usually consumed in low amounts and mostly unprocessed. Considering that the chronic exposure is not expected to exceed 10% of the ADI, investigation of the effect of industrial and/or household processing on the nature of the residues is not required.

Fluroxypyr is authorised to be used on crops that can be grown in rotation with other crops. According to the soil degradation studies evaluated in the framework of the peer review, the DT₉₀ value of fluroxypyr (as fluroxypyr acid) and of the main soil metabolites fluroxypyr pyridinol and fluroxypyr methoxypyridine exceed the trigger value of 100 days and, therefore, further studies investigating the nature and magnitude of residues in rotational crops are required. No studies on the magnitude of residues in rotational crops were submitted in the current MRL applications. Considering that the intended uses are on minor crops with application rates below the most critical uses reported for fluroxypyr, the lack of rotational crops field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of fluroxypyr methoxypyridine may be considered a minor deviation.

Based on the metabolic pattern identified in metabolism studies, the residue definitions for plant products as proposed in the MRL review are ‘sum of fluroxypyr, its salts, its esters and its conjugates, expressed as fluroxypyr’ for enforcement and risk assessment. Considering the available evidence, the same residue definition seems to be appropriate for the crops under consideration (minor leafy crops).

Sufficiently validated analytical methods based on high‐performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectroscopy (HPLC‐MS/MS) are available to quantify residues in the crops assessed in this application according to the residue definition for enforcement. The methods enable quantification of residues at or above 0.01 mg/kg in the crops assessed (LOQ).

The available residue trials are sufficient to derive MRL proposals for chives, celery leaves, parsley and basil and edible flowers. For thyme, a tentative MRL proposal was derived due to lack of detailed information on the capabilities of the analytical methods used in residue trials to analyse esters/conjugates and the storage period of samples which exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated.

Residues of fluroxypyr in commodities of animal origin were not assessed since the crops under consideration in this MRL application are not used for feed purposes.

The toxicological profile of fluroxypyr was assessed in the framework of the EU pesticides peer review under Directive 91/414/EEC and the data were sufficient to derive an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0.8 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. An acute reference dose (ARfD) was deemed unnecessary.

The consumer risk assessment was performed with revision 3.1 of the EFSA Pesticide Residues Intake Model (PRIMo). Considering the toxicological profile of the active substance, a short‐term dietary risk assessment was not necessary.

In the framework of the MRL review, and the assessment of confirmatory data following the MRL review, a comprehensive long‐term exposure assessment was performed, taking into account the existing uses at EU level. The long‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with regard only to consumers’ exposure from products of plant origin. Several plant commodities were excluded from the exposure assessment because EFSA assumes that uses have been withdrawn following the MRL review and that further uses will be revoked following the confirmatory data assessment. Products of animal origin were not included in the calculation considering that the requested confirmatory data on the toxicological relevance of fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates have not been provided which triggers the need for further risk management decision on the withdrawal of uses in feed products and grassland, and a revision of the existing MRLs for products of animal origin. EFSA updated the calculation with the relevant STMR values for the crops under consideration as derived from the residue trials submitted in support of this MRL application.

The estimated long‐term dietary intake was less than 0.1% of the ADI (all diets). The contribution of residues expected in the commodities assessed in the present applications to the overall long‐term exposure is each lower than 0.01% of the ADI. EFSA concluded that the proposed use of fluroxypyr on chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers will not result in a consumer exposure exceeding the toxicological reference value (ADI) and, therefore, is unlikely to pose a risk to consumers’ health.

EFSA proposes to amend the existing MRLs as reported in the summary table below.

Full details of all endpoints and the consumer risk assessment can be found in Appendices B–D.

Codea	Commodity	Existing EU MRL (mg/kg)	Proposed EU MRL (mg/kg)	Comment/justification
Enforcement residue definition: Sum of fluroxypyr, its salts, its esters and its conjugates, expressed as fluroxypyr
0256020	Chives	0.02*	0.5	The submitted data are sufficient to derive an MRL proposal. Risk for consumers unlikely
0256030	Celery leaves	0.02*	0.3
0256040	Parsley	0.02*	0.3
0256070	Thyme	0.05 ft	2 Further risk management considerations required	A tentative MRL proposal of 2 mg/kg was calculated on the basis of available residues trials. The MRL proposal is affected by additional non‐standard uncertainty due to lack of information whether the analytical methods used in the residue trials covered all components of the residue definition and the storage period of samples which exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated. Hence, the MRL and risk assessment values may be underestimated. Further risk management considerations are required whether these deficiencies are acceptable. Risk for consumers unlikely
0256080	Basil and edible flowers	0.02*	0.3	The submitted data are sufficient to derive an MRL proposal. Risk for consumers unlikely

MRL: maximum residue level.

^*Indicates that the MRL is set at the limit of analytical quantification (LOQ).

^aCommodity code number according to Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005.

^ftThe European Food Safety Authority identified some information on the analytical method used in the residue trials as unavailable. When re‐viewing the MRL, the Commission will take into account the information referred to in the first sentence, if it is submitted by 1 July 2017, or, if that information is not submitted by that date, the lack of it.

Assessment

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) received an application to modify the existing maximum residue level (MRL) for fluroxypyr in chives and thyme. Subsequently, EFSA received a second application to modify the existing MRL for fluroxypyr in celery leaves, parsley and basil and edible flowers to cover the intended uses in chives, coriander leaves and dill leaves,1 parsley, thyme and nasturtium (leaves and edible flowers).2 The detailed description of the intended uses of fluroxypyr in these crops, which are the basis for the current MRL applications, is reported in Appendix A.

Fluroxypyr is the ISO common name for 4‐amino‐3,5‐dichloro‐6‐fluoro‐2‐pyridyloxyacetic acid (IUPAC). The chemical structures of the active substance, the variant fluroxypyr‐meptyl and its main metabolites are reported in Appendix E.

In the EU, fluroxypyr is approved for use as active substance in plant protection products (herbicides); the process of the first renewal of the approval has been completed3 following the peer review process (EFSA, 2011) based on the RAR prepared by Ireland and Poland being the designated RMS and co‐RMS, respectively. The representative uses evaluated comprised outdoor foliar spraying against broadleaved weeds in cereals, maize and pasture/amenity.

The approval conditions were modified in 2017 in order to establish a maximum level for the impurity N–methyl‐2‐pyrrolidone (NMP) in the commercially manufactured active substance.

The EU MRLs for fluroxypyr are established in Annexes II of Regulation (EC) No 396/20054. The review of existing MRLs according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (MRL review) has been performed (EFSA, 2013) and the proposed modifications have been implemented in the MRL legislation.5 Recently, EFSA assessed confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review (EFSA, 2019b).

In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft, und Gartenbau (LLG) submitted two applications to the competent national authority in Germany (evaluating Member State, EMS) to modify the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the active substance fluroxypyr in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers. The EMS drafted two evaluation reports in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, which were submitted to the European Commission and forwarded to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) on 8 March 2017 and on 18 March 2020. As regards the application related to chives and thyme, EFSA requested additional information on the analytical method for high water content commodities. Other points were identified in both dossiers which needed further clarification. On 10 August 2020, the EMS submitted revised evaluation reports, which replaced the previously submitted evaluation reports (Germany, 2016, 2020). To accommodate for the intended uses of fluroxypyr, the EMS proposed to raise the existing MRL from the limit of quantification (LOQ) 0.02* to 0.4 mg/kg for chives and from 0.05 to 2 mg/kg for thyme and from the limit of quantification (LOQ) 0.02* to 0.3 mg/kg for basil, parsley and celery leaves.

EFSA based its assessment on the evaluation reports submitted by the EMS (Germany, 2016, 2020), the draft assessment report (DAR) (and its final addendum) (Ireland 2009, 2011) prepared under Council Directive 91/414/EEC, the Commission review report on fluroxypyr which was further updated and finalised on 23 March 2017 following the assessment of confirmatory data (European Commission, 2017a), the EFSA conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance fluroxypyr (EFSA, 2011), as well as the conclusions from previous EFSA opinions on the review of the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for fluroxypyr according to Article 12 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 (EFSA, 2013) and the evaluation of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review (EFSA, 2019b).

For this application, the data requirements established in Regulation (EU) No 544/20116 and the guidance documents applicable at the date of submission of the applications to the EMS are applicable (European Commission, 1997a, b, c, d, e, f, g, 2000, 2010a, b, 2017b; OECD, 2011, 2013). The assessment is performed in accordance with the legal provisions of the Uniform Principles for the Evaluation and the Authorisation of Plant Protection Products adopted by Commission Regulation (EU) No 546/20117.

A selected list of end points of the studies assessed by EFSA in the framework of this MRL application including the end points of relevant studies assessed previously is presented in Appendix B.

The evaluation reports submitted by the EMS (Germany, 2016, 2020) and the exposure calculations using the EFSA Pesticide Residues Intake Model (PRIMo) are considered as supporting documents to this reasoned opinion and, thus, are made publicly available as background documents to this reasoned opinion.

1. Residues in plants

1.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in plants

1.1.1. Nature of residues in primary crops

The metabolism of fluroxypyr (mepty and butoxypropyl ester) following foliar application in primary crops has been investigated in wheat and in onions (EFSA, 2013, 2019b). According to the relevant EU guidance document, metabolism studies in onions are considered representative for root crops (European Commission, 1997e).

In a wheat metabolism study, the overall distribution of the radioactivity was seen to be similar for both fluroxypyr‐butoxypropyl ester and fluroxypyr‐meptyl ester, although breakdown of the parent ester was slightly faster for fluroxypyr‐butoxypropyl (EFSA, 2013). In wheat forage, the proportion of the parent esters was gradually decreasing from c.a. 95% total radioactive residue (TRR) just after the treatment, to 8–18% TRR, 28 days after application. Inversely, the proportion of fluroxypyr slowly increased from 3% to 15% TRR 2 weeks after application, with significant amounts of polar unknowns that accounted for c.a. 50% TRR after 28 days. Following acidic hydrolysis incubations, fluroxypyr was released from these polar fractions, suggesting that these are mainly composed of conjugates of fluroxypyr. Similar conclusions were reached in a second study in wheat, in which up to 26.6% TRR (7.2 mg eq/kg) were tentatively identified as N‐glycosyl conjugates of fluroxypyr. In a third study in wheat, the extraction rate was rather low (32% TRR), but the high proportion (24% TRR) of polar compounds also suggests the presence of the fluroxypyr conjugates (EFSA, 2013).

In onion, fluroxypyr‐meptyl was rapidly taken up into shoots and bulbs where it was converted to free acid and conjugates of the acid in the same manner as previously demonstrated in the metabolism studies on wheat (EFSA, 2019b). In addition, two studies in broadleaved weed species provided only qualitative information and indicated a similar metabolic pattern as in wheat and onion (EFSA, 2013).

For leafy crops, a representative metabolism study was requested in the MRL review (EFSA, 2013). However, following a risk management decision, this data gap has not been implemented in the MRL legislation for the very minor leafy crops for which GAPs were notified, i.e. thyme and herbal infusions from flowers.

No additional studies on metabolism of fluroxypyr in primary crops were submitted in support of the present MRL applications which also concern minor leafy vegetables. However, considering the following aspects, the lack of a representative metabolism study on leafy crops may be considered a minor deficiency:

• the conditions of the metabolism studies in rotational crops in lettuce (see Section 1.1.2) can be considered to be also representative for the treatment of leafy crops at an early development stage;

• although onions are considered as being representative for metabolism in root crops (European Commission 1997a), the onion bulb is structurally a short stem with fleshy leaves. Hence, it is expected that the results of the metabolism study in onions are representative for the aerial parts of plants such as leaves;

• indicative results from metabolism studies in broadleaved weed showed a metabolic pattern comparable with cereals and onion where parent fluroxypyr was the main identified compound.

As the present assessment is also on very minor leafy crops, the lack of a representative metabolism study covering the group of leafy crops may be considered a minor deviation. This would be in line with the previous risk management decision to set MRLs for fluroxypyr in the minor leafy crops thyme and herbal infusions from flowers without requesting confirmatory data on primary crop metabolism.

For future applications to set MRLs on leafy crops, the data gap for a representative metabolism study covering foliar treatment on leafy vegetables needs to be addressed.

1.1.2. Nature of residues in rotational crops

Fluroxypyr is authorised to be used on crops that can be grown in rotation with other crops. According to the soil degradation studies evaluated in the framework of the peer review, the DT₉₀ value of fluroxypyr (as fluroxypyr acid) and of the main soil metabolites fluroxypyr pyridinol and fluroxypyr methoxypyridine exceed the trigger value of 100 days, and therefore, further studies investigating the nature and magnitude of residues in rotational crops are required (EFSA, 2011).

From the rotational crop metabolism studies assessed in the framework of the peer review, it was concluded that metabolism in rotational crops is similar to metabolism in primary crops (EFSA, 2011). In turnip roots, however, fluroxypyr methoxypyridine constituted the major part of the total residues (up to 75% TRR), suggesting a significant root uptake of this major soil metabolite (EFSA, 2013). The MRL review identified a data gap for rotational crops field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of fluroxypyr methoxypyridine in view of the high persistence in soil and the absence of toxicological data on this metabolite (EFSA, 2013). This data gap was considered relevant for the national authorisations and was therefore not reflected in the MRL legislation, requesting confirmatory data.

No new studies on rotational crops were submitted in the current MRL applications.

Considering that the intended uses are on minor crops with application rates below the most critical uses reported for fluroxypyr, the lack of rotational crops field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of fluroxypyr methoxypyridine may be considered a minor deviation. See also Section 1.2.2.

1.1.3. Nature of residues in processed commodities

Standard hydrolysis studies investigating the stability of the active substance under conditions representative for pasteurisation, boiling/cooking and sterilisation are not available. The commodities under consideration are usually consumed in low amounts and mostly unprocessed. Considering that the chronic exposure is not expected to exceed 10% of the ADI, investigation of the effect of industrial and/or household processing on the nature of the residues is not required.

1.1.4. Methods of analysis in plants

Analytical methods for the determination of fluroxypyr residues in high water content matrices were assessed during the evaluation of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review (EFSA, 2019b). The method requires alkaline hydrolysis to convert the esters to the fluroxypyr acid, and an acid hydrolysis to extract bound residues and cleave conjugates. The methods are sufficiently validated for the determination of residues of fluroxypyr and of the ester variant fluroxypyr‐meptyl, expressed as fluroxypyr acid equivalent, in the crops under consideration. The methods allow quantifying residues at or above the LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg for the total residue (sum of fluroxypyr and its salts, its esters and its conjugates) in crops belonging to the group of high water content, high acid content and dry matrices. Independent laboratory validation (ILV) is missing for high acid content matrices.

1.1.5. Storage stability of residues in plants

The storage stability of fluroxypyr residues in plants stored under frozen conditions was investigated in the framework of the EU pesticides peer review (EFSA, 2011). Additional storage stability data were submitted and assessed during the evaluation of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review (EFSA, 2019b). Overall, no significant decline of the total residues was observed during the tested storage period of 24 months.

1.1.6. Proposed residue definitions

Based on the metabolic pattern identified in metabolism studies and the capabilities of enforcement analytical methods, the following residue definition was proposed (EFSA, 2013, 2019b):

• Residue definition for risk assessment and for enforcement: sum of fluroxypyr, its salts, its esters and its conjugates, expressed as fluroxypyr.

In primary crops, this residue definition was restricted to cereals, root and tuber vegetables for uses comprising foliar treatment only, and to fruit crops for the uses assessed comprising soil treatment.

Considering the available evidence (see Section 1.1.1), EFSA agrees with the EMS (Germany, 2016) that the same residue definition seems to be appropriate for crops under consideration (minor leafy crops). For future applications on leafy crops, however, EFSA considers that the data gap for a representative metabolism study covering foliar treatment on leafy vegetables needs to be addressed.

The residue definition set for the primary crops was proposed to apply on a tentative basis to rotational crops. However, considering that the use pattern assessed in the current application (appl. rate 180 g/ha instead of 400 g/ha for the most critical use assessed under the MRL review) is less critical and that no significant residues are expected for the soil metabolite fluroxypyr methoxypyridine, the absence of toxicological data on this metabolite and rotational crops field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of this metabolite are not relevant for this application.

The residue definition for enforcement set in Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 is identical with the above‐mentioned residue definition.

1.2. Magnitude of residues in plants

1.2.1. Magnitude of residues in primary crops

In support of the MRL applications, the applicant submitted residue trials performed in chives, thyme, parsley and dill. The residue trials were performed with the active substance variant fluroxypyr‐meptyl (fluroxypyr‐1‐methylheptyl ester). Residue values are expressed as fluroxypyr equivalents, in accordance with the residue definition for risk assessment and for enforcement.

The methods of analysis in the residue trials are reported to allow quantifying residues of fluroxypyr (total residue) in the crops under consideration at or above an LOQ of 0.01 mg/kg (by HPLC‐MS/MS) or at or above an LOQ of 0.025 mg/kg (by GC‐MS). The samples of these residue trials were stored under conditions for which integrity of the samples has been demonstrated, with the exception of two trials on thyme (see below).

Chives

In support of the proposed NEU GAP, in total five residue trials were conducted on chives in Germany in 2007, 2008 and 2014 (72 g a.s./ha (one trial) or 90 g a.s./ha, two applications, 21‐day PHI) (Germany, 2016). Two trials were not independent, as they were carried out at the same location at roughly the same time and so only one of the trials (the trial with the higher residue concentration measured) was considered. Two trials were performed with foliar spray applications at growth stages BBCH 16–19; in the remaining two trials, treatment of the crop occurred after cutting (BBCH 40–45). Three trials were decline studies and were also submitted in support of the NEU GAP in nasturtium, coriander leaves, dill leaves and parsley (28‐day PHI, see below).

The intended use for chives foresees application either post‐emergence in the year of sowing (from growth stage BBCH 12) or in the following year(s) after cutting, at the beginning of the principal growth stage 4 (from BBCH 41). According to expert judgement, the parameter having the main impact on the residue behaviour in the case of chives is the PHI; the different growth stages at the treatment are considered of having no major impact on the final residues in harvested chives. Hence, the residue trials performed at BBCH 16–19 and at BBCH 40–45 are considered representative for the intended use.

As regards the analytical methods used to analyse the samples, EFSA noted a minor deficiency: full validation data on the efficiency of the acid hydrolysis step (required to cleave conjugates of fluroxypyr) are not available. However, the EMS reported that hydrolytic conditions were assumed to cleave conjugates (Germany, 2016), and therefore, the trials are considered valid.

Overall, the number and quality of the trials are sufficient to derive an MRL proposal of 0.5 mg/kg for chives. The slightly different MRL proposal derived by EFSA compared to the MRL proposal made by the EMS can be explained by the fact that EFSA excluded one trial which was considered not fully independent.

Thyme

In support of the proposed NEU GAP, four residue trials were conducted on thyme in Germany in 2002, 2004 and 2007 (90 g a.s./ha, one application, 28‐day PHI) (Germany, 2016). Trials were performed with foliar spray applications. Although the detailed growth stages are not reported, the trials are considered acceptable because samples were taken 28 days after treatment in accordance with the GAP.

In the methods of analysis used to analyse the thyme samples, details are not provided on the hydrolytic conditions. EFSA requested clarification on the efficiency of the hydrolysis step for the methods of analysis used in the residue trials for the determination of fluroxypyr ester and conjugates, which was also identified in the MRL review as a confirmatory data requirement for MRLs for thyme and various other commodities. However, this information could not be retrieved from the study reports and thus was considered not addressed (EFSA, 2019b). In the present application, the EMS provided specific explanations of the analytical method descriptions (in the header of the study results Section C.3.1.2 of the evaluation report) in which alkaline hydrolytic conditions are mentioned, but the details on the conditions used were not provided, and it remains unclear if conjugates were cleaved (Germany, 2016). Hence, the efficiency of the release of the free fluroxypyr acid has not been demonstrated and the results of these residue trials may underestimate the actual residues.

The sample storage periods in two trials (26 and 30 months) exceed the demonstrated storage stability (24 months). Therefore, the results from these trials are considered to be affected by an additional source of non‐standard uncertainty.

An MRL proposal of 2 mg/kg was calculated for thyme. The MRL proposal may be underestimated due to lack of information on the capabilities of the analytical methods used in residue trials on thyme to analyse conjugates and the storage period of samples exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated.

Nasturtium (basil and edible flowers), coriander leaves (celery leaves), dill leaves (celery leaves) and parsley

In support of the NEU GAP in nasturtium, coriander leaves, dill leaves and parsley, a total of five residue trials were conducted on chives (three trials), dill (one trial) and parsley (one trial) in Germany in 2008, 2014 and 2016 (Germany, 2020).

Trials consisted of foliar spray applications (81 a.s./ha (one trial, dill) or 90 g a.s./ha, two applications, 28‐day PHI) at growth stages BBCH 12–19 or BBCH 41–45. Minor deviations regarding the application interval were considered as not having an impact on the validity of the trials.

Extrapolation is possible from any representative of the subgroup herbs and edible flowers (0256000) except sage, rosemary, thyme and laurel/bay leave, to the whole subgroup herbs and edible flowers, including celery leaves (coriander leaves and dill leaves), parsley, and basil and edible flowers (nasturtium leaves and flowers) (European Commission, 2017b).

Overall, the number and quality of the trials are sufficient to derive MRL proposals of 0.3 mg/kg for celery leaves (coriander leaves and dill leaves), parsley, and basil and edible flowers (nasturtium leaves and edible flowers).

A summary of residues data from the supervised residue trials assessed is presented in Appendix B.1.2.1.

1.2.2. Magnitude of residues in rotational crops

No new studies on rotational crops were submitted in the current MRL applications. The possible transfer of fluroxypyr residues to crops that are grown in rotation has been assessed in the framework of the MRL review on the basis of the available confined rotational crop metabolism studies and the tentative residue definition for rotational crops. In the confined rotational crop metabolism studies assessed in the MRL review, after bare soil application at 600 or 700 kg a.s./ha (3.3 N or 3.9 N), residue levels at 30‐day plant back interval were up to 0.04 and 0.08 mg eq/kg in lettuce and turnip roots, respectively (EFSA, 2013).8

EFSA agrees with the EMS who concluded that significant residue levels in rotational crops (exceeding 0.01 mg/kg) are not anticipated, provided that the active substance is applied according to the proposed GAP (Germany, 2016). Considering that the maximum annual application rate for foliar applications of fluroxypyr in the crops under consideration (i.e. 180 g a.s./ha) is lower than the application rates tested in the confined rotational crop metabolism studies on bare soil (i.e. 3.3 N or 3.9 N), the EMS proposed that significant residue levels are not anticipated in rotational crops (exceeding 0.01 mg/kg), provided that the active substance is applied according to the proposed GAP. EFSA considered that sufficient information is not available to conclude on the potential magnitude of residues in rotational crops.

The MRL review identified a data gap for rotational crop field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of the soil metabolite fluroxypyr methoxypyridine in view of the high persistence and absence of toxicological data on this metabolite. The MRL review concluded that if this data gap is not addressed in the future, Member States are recommended to withdraw or modify the relevant authorisations at national level. Meanwhile, Member States were also recommended to avoid rotation with root and tuber crops (EFSA, 2013). Considering that the intended uses are on minor leafy crops with application rates below the most critical uses reported for fluroxypyr, the lack of rotational crops field trials covering the maximum plateau concentration of fluroxypyr methoxypyridine may be considered a minor deviation.

1.2.3. Magnitude of residues in processed commodities

The commodities under consideration are mostly consumed unprocessed. Considering the low contribution to the dietary exposure, specific processing studies for the crops under assessment are not available and are not required.

1.2.4. Proposed MRLs

The available data are considered sufficient to derive MRL proposals as well as risk assessment values for the commodities under evaluation, except thyme. The tentative MRL proposal and risk assessment values for thyme are affected by additional non‐standard uncertainty, due to lack of detailed information on the capabilities of the analytical methods used in residue trials to analyse esters/conjugates and the storage period of samples which exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated (see Section 1.2.1). A summary of the proposed MRLs is presented in Appendix B.4.

In Section 3, EFSA assessed whether residues on these crops resulting from the intended uses are likely to pose a consumer health risk.

2. Residues in livestock

Not relevant as various crops under assessment are not used for feed purposes.

3. Consumer risk assessment

EFSA performed a dietary risk assessment using revision 3.1 of the EFSA PRIMo (EFSA, 2018, 2019a). This exposure assessment model contains food consumption data for different subgroups of the EU population and allows the acute and chronic exposure assessment to be performed in accordance with the internationally agreed methodology for pesticide residues (FAO, 2016).

The toxicological reference value for fluroxypyr used in the risk assessment (i.e. ADI) was derived in the framework of the EU pesticides peer review (European Commission, 2017a). No acute reference dose (ARfD) has been derived and considered to not be required for fluroxypyr (European Commission, 2017a).

Short‐term (acute) dietary risk assessment

A short‐term (acute) dietary risk assessment is not necessary for plant commodities because an ARfD was not required due to the toxicological profile for the active substance fluroxypyr.

Long‐term (chronic) dietary risk assessment

In the framework of the MRL review and the assessment of confirmatory data following the MRL review, a comprehensive long‐term exposure assessment was performed, taking into account the existing uses at EU level (EFSA, 2013, EFSA, 2019b). The long‐term dietary risk assessment was performed with regard only to consumers’ exposure from products of plant origin. Several plant commodities were excluded from the exposure assessment because EFSA assumes that uses have been withdrawn following the MRL review and that further uses will be revoked following the confirmatory data assessment (EFSA, 2019b). Products of animal origin were not included in the calculation considering that the requested confirmatory data on the toxicological relevance of fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates have not been provided which triggers the need for further risk management decision on the withdrawal of uses in feed products and grassland, and a revision of the existing MRLs for products of animal origin (EFSA, 2019b).

EFSA updated the calculation with the relevant STMR values derived from the residue trials submitted in support of the present MRL applications on chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers. The input values used in the exposure calculations are summarised in Appendix D.1.

The estimated long‐term dietary intake from products of plant origin was less than 0.1% of the ADI (all diets). The contribution of residues expected in the commodities assessed in this application to the overall long‐term exposure is each lower than 0.01% of the ADI.

EFSA concluded that, based on the risk assessment, the long‐term intake of residues of fluroxypyr resulting from the intended uses in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers is unlikely to present a risk to consumer health.

For further details on the exposure calculations, a screenshot of the Report sheet of the PRIMo is presented in Appendix C.

4. Conclusion and Recommendations

The data submitted in support of this MRL application were found to be sufficient to derive MRL proposals for chives, celery leaves, parsley, and basil and edible flowers. EFSA also derived a tentative MRL proposal for thyme which is affected by additional non‐standard uncertainty due to lack of information on the capabilities of the analytical methods used in residue trials to analyse esters/conjugates and the storage period of samples which exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated.

EFSA concluded that, based on the risk assessment outlined in Section 3, the long‐term intake of residues of fluroxypyr resulting from the existing and the intended uses in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers is unlikely to present a risk to consumer health.

The MRL recommendations are summarised in Appendix B.4.

Abbreviations

a.s.

active substance

ADI

acceptable daily intake

ARfD

acute reference dose

BBCH

growth stages of mono‐ and dicotyledonous plants

bw

body weight

CAS

Chemical Abstract Service

DAR

draft assessment report

DAT

days after treatment

DT₉₀

period required for 90% dissipation (define method of estimation)

EC

emulsifiable concentrate

EMS

evaluating Member State

eq

residue expressed as a.s. equivalent

FAO

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GAP

Good Agricultural Practice

GC

gas chromatography

GC‐MS

gas chromatography with mass spectrometry

HPLC

high‐performance liquid chromatography

HPLC‐MS

high‐performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry

HPLC‐MS/MS

high‐performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry

HR

highest residue

IEDI

international estimated daily intake

IESTI

international estimated short‐term intake

ILV

independent laboratory validation

ISO

International Organisation for Standardisation

IUPAC

International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry

LC

liquid chromatography

LOQ

limit of quantification

MRL

maximum residue level

MS

Member States

MS

mass spectrometry detector

MS/MS

tandem mass spectrometry detector

MW

molecular weight

NEU

northern Europe

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development

PF

processing factor

PHI

pre‐harvest interval

RA

risk assessment

RAC

raw agricultural commodity

RD

residue definition

RMS

rapporteur Member State

SANCO

Directorate‐General for Health and Consumers

SC

suspension concentrate

SL

soluble concentrate

SP

water‐soluble powder

STMR

supervised trials median residue

TAR

total applied radioactivity

TMDI

theoretical maximum daily intake

TRR

total radioactive residue

UV

ultraviolet (detector)

WHO

World Health Organization

Appendix A – Summary of intended GAP triggering the amendment of existing EU MRLs

1.

Crop and/or situation	NEU, SEU, MS or country	F G or Ia	Pests or group of pests controlled	Preparation		Application				Application rate per treatment				PHI (days)e	Remarks
				Typeb	Conc. a.s.	Method kind	Range of growth stages & seasonc	Number min–max	Interval between application (min)	g a.s./hL min–max	Water L/ha min–max	Rated	Unit
Chives	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous, weeds, Galium aparine	EC	180 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	BBCH 12	2	7		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	21	Chives is a perennial crop which is harvested several times a year
Chives	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous, weeds, Galium aparine	EC	180 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	BBCH 41	2	7		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	21	Application growth stage after cutting of the crop (BBCH 41). Chives is a perennial crop which is harvested several times a year
Thyme	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous, weeds, Galium aparine	EC	180 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	BBCH 12	1	–		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28	Thyme is a perennial crop
Thyme	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous, weeds, Galium aparine	EC	180 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	BBCH 41	1	–		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28	Thyme is a perennial crop with application intended from the second year after sprouting (from BBCH 41)
Coriander leaves	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous weeds, catchweed bedstraw		260 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	12–16	2	5		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28	MRL application refers to celery leaves (0256030)
Dill leaves	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous weeds, catchweed bedstraw		260 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	13–16	2	5		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28	MRL application refers to celery leaves (0256030)
Parsley	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous weeds, catchweed bedstraw		260 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	13–16	2	5		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28
Nasturtium (leaves and edible flowers)	NEU	F	Annual dicotyledonous weeds, catchweed bedstraw		260 g/L	Foliar treatment – broadcast spraying	12–14	2	5		200–400	90	g a.i./ha	28	MRL application refers to basil and edible flowers (0256080)

MRL: maximum residue level; GAP: Good Agricultural Practice; NEU: northern European Union; SEU: southern European Union; MS: Member State; a.s.: active substance; EC: emulsifiable concentrate.

^aOutdoor or field use (F), greenhouse application (G) or indoor application (I).

^bCropLife International Technical Monograph no 2, 7th Edition. Revised March 2017. Catalogue of pesticide formulation types and international coding system.

^cGrowth stage range from first to last treatment (BBCH Monograph, Growth Stages of Plants, 1997, Blackwell, ISBN 3‐8263‐3152‐4), including, where relevant, information on season at time of application.

^dApplication rate is expressed as fluroxypyr acid.

^ePHI – minimum preharvest interval.

Appendix B – List of end points

B.1. Residues in plants

B.1.1. Nature of residues and methods of analysis in plants

B.1.1.1. Metabolism studies, methods of analysis and residue definitions in plants

Primary crops (available studies)	Crop groups	Crop(s)	Application(s)	Sampling (DAT)	Comment/Source
	Fruit crops	–	–	–	No representative metabolism study available. The MRL review considered that for the specific uses assessed for fruit crops following soil treatment (citrus fruits, pome fruits), the metabolism is sufficiently addressed by the available rotational crop metabolism studies after bare soil application (EFSA, 2013)
	Root crops	Onions	Foliar, F BBCH 09–13 1× 0.1 kg, 2× 0.1 kg, 1× 0.2 kg or 2× 0.2 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Plants: 0, 3, 14, 28 Root, bulb, skin, shoots: 3 months, 3.5 months	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl (EFSA, 2019b)
	Leafy crops	–	–	–	No representative metabolism study available
	Cereals/grass	Spring wheat	Foliar, F BBCH 37–39 1 × 0.3 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Whole plant: 0 Stalk and leaves; heads: 28 Straw and grain: 62	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl (EFSA, 2013)
		Spring wheat	Foliar, G BBCH 31 1 × 0.6 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Wheat forage: 0, 13 Straw and grain: 62	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl (EFSA, 2013)
		Winter wheat	Foliar, F BBCH 31 1 × 0.2 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Whole plant: 0, 3, 7, 14, 28 Straw and grain: 104	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl (EFSA, 2013)
		Winter wheat	Foliar, F BBCH 31 1 × 0.2 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Whole plant: 0, 3, 7, 14, 28 Straw and grain: 104	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐butoxypropyl ester (EFSA, 2013)
	Pulses/oilseeds	–	–	–	–
	Miscellaneous	Broadleaved weed species (Galium aparine)	Foliar 1 × 0.15 kg fluroxypyr/ha	7	Radiolabelled active substance: not specified Indicative information (EFSA, 2013)
		Broadleaved weed species (Stellaria media, Viola arvensis)	Foliar, G 1 × 0.075 kg fluroxypyr/ha	Whole plant: 1, 7	Radiolabelled active substance: 2,6‐14C ring‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Indicative information (EFSA, 2013)

Rotational crops (available studies)	Crop groups	Crop(s)	Application(s)	PBI (DAT)	Comment/Source
	Root/tuber crops	Turnip	Bare soil, F 0.6 kg a.s./ha	30 120(b) 366	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Root and tops Harvest intervals: 98, 183, 438 DAT(EFSA, 2013)
		Turnip	Bare soil, F 0.7 kg a.s./ha	30 120 365	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Root and tops Harvest intervals: 91, 215, 428 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
	Leafy crops	Lettuce	Bare soil, F 0.6 kg a.s./ha	30 120(b) 366	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Harvest intervals: 86, 113, 128, 156, 200, 225, 422, 443 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
		Lettuce	Bare soil, F 0.7 kg a.s./ha	30 120 365	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Harvest intervals: 77, 168, 418 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
	Cereal (small grain)	Wheat	Bare soil, F 0.6 kg a.s./ha	30 120(b) 366	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Grain and straw Harvest intervals: 128, 232, 458 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
		Wheat	Bare soil, F 0.7 kg a.s./ha	30 120 365	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Immature plant, grain, chaff and straw Harvest intervals: 83, 156, 202, 289, 414, 467 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
		Corn	Bare soil, F 0.7 kg a.s./ha	365	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Fodder and grain Harvest interval: 467 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
	Pulses/oilseeds	Green beans	Bare soil, F 0.6 kg a.s./ha	30 366	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Whole plant and beans Harvest interval: 94, 119, 441, 451 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
		Soya beans	Bare soil, F 0.6 kg a.s./ha	120(b)	Radiolabelled active substance: 14C‐pyridinyl‐labelled fluroxypyr‐meptyl Beans and trash Harvest interval: 226 DAT (EFSA, 2013)
	Other	–	–	–	–

Processed commodities (hydrolysis study)	Conditions	Stable?	Comment/Source
	Pasteurisation (20 min, 90°C, pH 4)	Not triggered	–
	Baking, brewing and boiling (60 min, 100°C, pH 5)	Not triggered	–
	Sterilisation (20 min, 120°C, pH 6)	Not triggered	–
	Other processing conditions	–	–

(a): Outdoor/field application (F) or glasshouse/protected/indoor application (G).

(b): The 120 DAT plot was under greenhouse conditions.

B.1.1.2. Stability of residues in plants

Plant products (available studies)	Category	Commodity	T (°C)	Stability period		Compounds covered	Comment/Source
				Value	Unit
	High water content	Wheat forage	−18	24	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2011)
	High water content	Corn forage	−20	11	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2019b)
	High oil content	Olive fruit Olive oil	−18	10	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2019b)
	High protein content	–	–	–	–	–	–
	Dry/High starch	Wheat grain	−18	24	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2011)
	Dry/High starch	Corn grain	−20	10	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2019b)
	High acid content	Orange fruit Orange peel	−18	10	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2019b)
	Processed products	–	–	–	–	–	–
	Others	Corn stover	−20	11	Months	Fluroxypyr	EFSA (2019b)

B.1.2. Magnitude of residues in plants

B.1.2.1. Summary of residues data from the supervised residue trials

Commodity	Region/Indoora	Residue levels observed in the supervised residue trials (mg/kg)	Comments/Source	Calculated MRL (mg/kg)	HRb (mg/kg)	STMRc (mg/kg)
Chives	NEU	0.040, 0.047, 0.11, 0.21(†)	Residue trials on chives compliant with GAP (†) highest residue value of two trials not sufficiently independent regarding geographical location and dates of treatments but performed with different experimental conditions (different growth stages)	0.5	0.21	0.08
Thyme	NEU	0.46(‡), 0.57, 0.66, 0.84(‡)	Residue trials on thyme compliant with GAP. Limited information is available on the capabilities of the analytical methods used in residue trials, and it remains unclear if conjugates were analysed in accordance with the residue definition (‡) sample storage exceeds the demonstrated stability period	2 (tentative)	0.84	0.62
Nasturtium (basil and edible flowers), coriander leaves (celery leaves), dill leaves (celery leaves), parsley	NEU	Dill: < 0.01 Chives: < 0.025, 0.064, 0.12(†) Parsley: < 0.01	Residue trial on dill (1) compliant with the GAP. Residue trials on chives (3) and parsley (1) not fully compliant with the GAP were judged as acceptable (†) highest residue value of two trials not sufficiently independent regarding geographical location and dates of treatments but performed with different experimental conditions (different growth stages) Extrapolation is possible to the whole subgroup herbs and edible flowers, including celery leaves (coriander leaves and dill leaves), parsley, and basil and edible flowers (nasturtium leaves and flowers)	0.3	0.12	0.03

MRL: maximum residue level; GAP: Good Agricultural Practice.

^aNEU: Outdoor trials conducted in northern Europe, SEU: Outdoor trials conducted in southern Europe, Indoor: indoor EU trials or Country code: if non‐EU trials.

^bHighest residue. The highest residue for risk assessment refers to the whole commodity and not to the edible portion.

^cSupervised trials median residue. The median residue for risk assessment refers to the whole commodity and not to the edible portion.

B.1.2.2. Residues in rotational crops

B.1.2.3. Processing factors

No processing studies were submitted in the framework of the present MRL applications.

B.2. Residues in livestock

Not relevant for the commodities under assessment.

B.3. Consumer risk assessment

B.4. Recommended MRLs

Codea	Commodity	Existing EU MRL (mg/kg)	Proposed EU MRL (mg/kg)	Comment/justification
Enforcement residue definition: Sum of fluroxypyr, its salts, its esters and its conjugates, expressed as fluroxypyr
0256020	Chives	0.02*	0.5	The submitted data are sufficient to derive an MRL proposal. Risk for consumers unlikely
0256030	Celery leaves	0.02*	0.3
0256040	Parsley	0.02*	0.3
0256070	Thyme	0.05 ft	2 Further risk management considerations required	A tentative MRL proposal of 2 mg/kg was calculated on the basis of available residues trials. The MRL proposal is affected by additional non‐standard uncertainty due to lack of information whether the analytical methods used in the residue trials covered all components of the residue definition and the storage period of samples which exceeded the period for which integrity of the samples was demonstrated. Hence, the MRL and risk assessment values may be underestimated. Further risk management considerations are required whether these deficiencies are acceptable. Risk for consumers unlikely
0256080	Basil and edible flowers	0.02*	0.3	The submitted data are sufficient to derive an MRL proposal. Risk for consumers unlikely

MRL: maximum residue level.

^*Indicates that the MRL is set at the limit of analytical quantification (LOQ).

^aCommodity code number according to Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005.

^ftThe European Food Safety Authority identified some information on the analytical method used in the residue trials as unavailable. When re‐viewing the MRL, the Commission will take into account the information referred to in the first sentence, if it is submitted by 1 July 2017, or, if that information is not submitted by that date, the lack of it.

Appendix C – Pesticide Residue Intake Model (PRIMo)

1.

Appendix D – Input values for the exposure calculations

D.1. Consumer risk assessment

Commodity	Chronic risk assessment		Acute risk assessment
	Input value (mg/kg)	Comment	Input value (mg/kg)	Comment
Residue definition for risk assessment: sum of fluroxypyr, its salts, its esters and its conjugates, expressed as fluroxypyr
Apples	0.01	EFSA (2019b)	A short‐term (acute) dietary risk assessment is not necessary for plant commodities because an ARfD has been considered not required due to the toxicological profile for the active substance fluroxypyr
Onions	0.01	EFSA (2019b)
Chives	0.08	Germany (2016)
Celery leaves (coriander leaves, dill leaves)	0.03	Germany (2020)
Parsley	0.03	Germany (2020)
Thyme	0.62	Germany (2016)
Basil and edible flowers (nasturtium leaves and flowers)	0.03	Germany (2020)
Other plant commodities	–	Several plant commodities were excluded from the exposure assessment because EFSA assumes that uses have been withdrawn following the MRL review and that further uses will be revoked following the confirmatory data assessment (EFSA, 2019b)
Residue definition for risk assessment: Ruminants: sum of fluroxypyr and its salts, expressed as fluroxypyr (tentatively derived in the MRL review) General recommendation: The tentative residue definition for risk assessment (ruminants) should be reconsidered because the metabolite fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates may be present at significant levels in products of animal origin. Toxicological information on fluroxypyr pyridinol is not available and is required in order to assess whether fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates are of lower, similar or higher toxicity in comparison with the parent fluroxypyr or whether specific reference values should be set (EFSA, 2019b)
Commodities of animal origin	–	The long‐term (chronic) risk assessment was not performed for products of animal origin. The long‐term dietary risk assessment should be updated pending confirmation of the residue definition for risk assessment for ruminants and the data gap for toxicological information on the metabolite fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates (EFSA, 2019b)	A short‐term dietary risk assessment may be required for products of animal origin, pending confirmation of the residue definition for risk assessment for products of animal origin (ruminants) and the data gap for toxicological information on the metabolite fluroxypyr pyridinol and its conjugates (EFSA, 2019b)

MRL: maximum residue level; ARfD: acute reference dose.

Appendix E – Used compound codes

1.

Code/trivial namea	IUPAC name/SMILES notation/InChiKeyb	Structural formulac
Fluroxypyr Fluroxypyr acid	4‐amino‐3,5‐dichloro‐6‐fluoro‐2‐pyridyloxyacetic acid O=C(O)COc1nc(F)c(Cl)c(N)c1Cl MEFQWPUMEMWTJP‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N
Fluroxypyr‐meptyl Fluroxypyr‐MHE Fluroxypyr methylheptyl Fluroxypyr 1‐methylheptyl	(RS)‐1‐methylheptyl [(4‐amino‐3,5‐dichloro‐6‐fluoro‐2‐pyridyl)oxy]acetate CC(CCCCCC)OC(=O)COc1nc(F)c(Cl)c(N)c1Cl OLZQTUCTGLHFTQ‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N
Fluroxypyr‐butoxypropyl Fluroxypyr‐BPE	(RS)‐2‐butoxy‐1‐methylethyl [(4‐amino‐3,5‐dichloro‐6‐fluoro‐2‐pyridyl)oxy]acetate CC(COCCCC)OC(=O)COc1nc(F)c(Cl)c(N)c1Cl ZKFARSBUEBZZJT‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N
Fluroxypyr pyridinol Fluroxypyr 2‐pyridinol	4‐amino‐3,5‐dichloro‐6‐fluoropyridin‐2‐ol Nc1c(Cl)c(F)nc(O)c1Cl JPMASQTVFRLSAV‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N
N ‐methyl‐2-pyrrolidone NMP	1‐methyl‐2‐pyrrolidinone O=C1CCCN1C SECXISVLQFMRJM‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N
Fluroxypyr methoxypyridine DMP	3,5‐dichloro‐2‐fluoro‐6‐methoxypyridin‐4‐amine Clc1c(N)c(Cl)c(F)nc1OC XBFLRBRESHZOLD‐UHFFFAOYSA‐N

IUPAC: International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry; SMILES: simplified molecular‐input line‐entry system; InChiKey: International Chemical Identifier Key.

^aThe metabolite name in bold is the name used in the reasoned opinion.

^bACD/Name 2018.2.2 ACD/Labs 2018 Release (File version N50E41, Build 103230, 21 July 2018).

^cACD/ChemSketch 2018.2.2 ACD/Labs 2018 Release (File version C60H41, Build 106041, 7 December 2018).

Suggested citation: EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) , Anastassiadou M, Bernasconi G, Brancato A, Carrasco Cabrera L, Ferreira L, Greco L, Jarrah S, Kazocina A, Leuschner R, Magrans JO, Miron I, Nave S, Pedersen R, Reich H, Rojas A, Sacchi A, Santos M, Theobald A, Vagenende B and Verani A, 2020. Reasoned opinion on the modification of the existing maximum residue levels for fluroxypyr in chives, celery leaves, parsley, thyme and basil and edible flowers. EFSA Journal 2020;18(10):6273, 27 pp. 10.2903/j.efsa.2020.6273