Open AccessPeer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance 1‐methylcyclopropene
Author(s) -
Arena Maria,
Auteri Domenica,
Barmaz Stefania,
Brancato Alba,
Brocca Daniela,
Bura Laszlo,
Carrasco Cabrera Luis,
Chiusolo Arianna,
Civitella Consuelo,
Court Marques Daniele,
Crivellente Federica,
Ctverackova Lucie,
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,
Mineo Desire,
Miron Ileana,
Molnar Tunde,
Padovani Laura,
Parra Morte Juan Manuel,
Pedersen Ragnor,
Reich Hermine,
Riemenschneider Christina,
Sacchi Angela,
Santos Miguel,
Serafimova Rositsa,
Sharp Rachel,
Stanek Alois,
Streissl Franz,
Sturma Juergen,
Szentes Csaba,
Tarazona Jose,
Terron Andrea,
Theobald Anne,
Vagenende Benedicte,
Van Dijk Joanke,
VillamarBouza Laura
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
efsa journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.076
H-Index - 97
ISSN - 1831-4732
DOI - 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5308
Subject(s) - context (archaeology) , member state , european commission , environmental health , risk assessment , member states , commission , business , toxicology , medicine , european union , biology , computer security , international trade , computer science , paleontology , finance
The conclusions of EFSA following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State the United Kingdom and the co‐rapporteur Member State Portugal for the pesticide active substance 1‐methylcyclopropene are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation ( EU ) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of 1‐methylcyclopropene as a plant growth regulator on apples. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are identified.