Enterococcus lactis NCIMB 11181 (formerly E. faecium) for poultry and ornamental birds in feed and water for drinking: spread-plate count on bile aesculin azide agar according to EN 15788, identification by PFGE according to CEN/TS 17697, minimum 3 × 10¹⁰ CFU/kg
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1122, published on 27 May 2026, authorises until 16 June 2036 a preparation of Enterococcus lactis NCIMB 11181 (holder Chr. Hansen A/S) as a gut flora stabiliser for poultry for fattening and reared for laying or breeding and ornamental birds, in feed and in water for drinking. In 2024 EFSA considered the additive safe but could not confirm efficacy, as only 2 of 6 trials showed a significant improvement; in 2025, after new trials, it considered it potentially efficacious.
- Methods in the annex: viable counts in the additive, premixtures, compound feed and water for drinking are determined by the spread-plate method on bile aesculin azide agar according to EN 15788; the strain is identified by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) according to CEN/TS 17697 or by DNA sequencing methods. The EU reference laboratory considered its 2012 evaluation of the methods still valid.
- Composition: solid form — at least 5 × 10¹⁰ CFU/g (according to EFSA 12–16 % active agent on maltodextrin), water-soluble solid form — at least 2 × 10¹¹ CFU/g (45–50 % on sorbitol), given in water for drinking. Minimum content: 3 × 10¹⁰ CFU/kg complete feed or 1.5 × 10¹⁰ CFU/L water; EFSA derived the water value from poultry drinking two to three times as much water as the dry matter of feed they eat. The additive may be combined with the coccidiostats monensin sodium and decoquinate.
- New trials in the 2025 EFSA opinion: two experiments with 1008 male Ross 308 chickens each for 35 days. In the feed for the control groups 2.3 × 10⁷ and 1.8 × 10⁷ CFU/kg were found, and in the supplemented feed 1.1 × 10¹¹ and 3.7 × 10¹⁰ CFU/kg against the intended 3 × 10¹⁰. In the first experiment weight gain and final body weight increased, but mortality was 6.9 % against 3.2 % in the control and EFSA did not count it as positive; in the second the feed-to-gain ratio improved (1.53 vs 1.55).
- A re-analysis of the pooled data from two earlier trials showed no differences, and two published studies were not considered because husbandry conditions differed from EU practice. The water-soluble form is not a skin or eye irritant; for the solid form EFSA could not conclude on irritation, for both forms not on skin sensitisation, and it considered both respiratory sensitisers. Eye protection is required only for the solid forms.