Publications
NIBIOs employees contribute to several hundred scientific articles and research reports every year. You can browse or search in our collection which contains references and links to these publications as well as other research and dissemination activities. The collection is continously updated with new and historical material.
2025
Authors
Atle Wibe Berit Marie Blomstrand Lisa Deiana Davide Bochicchio Tommy Ruud Richard Helliwell Matthias Koesling Anne Grete Kongsted Marina Štukelj Marina Spinu A Vasiu Andrew Richard Williams Amalie Camilla Pedersen Helena Meijer Stig Milan ThamsborgAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Chala Adugna Kufa Afework Bekele Anagaw Meshesha Atickem Desalegn Chala Diress Tsegaye Alemu Torbjørn Ergon Nils Christian Stenseth Dietmar ZinnerAbstract
Ethiopia is home to two subspecies of Colobus guereza, C. g. guereza and C. g. gallarum. Whereas C. g. guereza is listed as Least Concern by IUCN, the conservation status of C. g. gallarum is unclear, but according to a recent assessment, it will most likely be listed as Vulnerable, because of habitat loss due to agricultural expansion. We used climate data to model the habitat suitability for both taxa in a comparative study to identify suitable habitats within and outside of protected areas that may serve as Anthropocene refugia. Our ensemble models estimated 168,731 km2 as climatically suitable habitat for C. g. guereza and 69,542 km2 for C. g. gallarum with an overlap between the two taxa of 17.2 %. Areas that qualified as refugia, i.e., areas covered by forest, were 47,101 km2 (only 27.9 % of the total suitable habitat) and 8430 km2 (12.1 % of the suitable habitat) for C. g. guereza and C. g. gallarum, respectively. Of these, 39.8 % (C. g. guereza) and 53.7 % (C. g. gallarum) are within Ethiopia’s current protected area network. Given that potential Anthropocene refugia are found only partly within protected areas, conservation management should include this information when developing conservation strategies for both taxa. As the majority of suitable habitats for the two colobus taxa exist in non-forested regions, afforestation in these areas would be highly beneficial and is strongly recommended.
Authors
Eystein Skjerve Erik Georg Granquist Tone Kristin Bjordal Johansen Ingrid Olsen Truls Nesbakken Amin Sayyari Kristin Opdal Seljetun Morten Tryland Åsa Maria Olofsdotter Espmark Grete H. M. Jørgensen Janicke Nordgreen Ingrid Olesen Sonal Jayesh Patel Sokratis Ptochos Marco Vindas Tor Atle MoAbstract
Following the verification of bovine tuberculosis (bTB) after an outbreak in 2022, concerns were raised about the true epidemiological situation of bTB in Norway. Consequently, the Norwegian Food Safety Authority commissioned VKM to assess the risk of introducing Mycobacterium bovis to Norway, and the risk of its spread and establishment in Norwegian livestock and wild fauna. VKM was also tasked with assessing the risk of infection to humans and identifying risk-reducing measures and diagnostic options for detecting infection in Norway. Background: bTB is a bacterial disease affecting animals and humans, caused by M. bovis. The prevalence varies greatly across European countries. Norway has held an official free status since 1963, with only a few cases reported in the 1980s. The 2022 outbreak was identified through routine meat inspection, revealing several infected animals in a specific herd. The source of this outbreak remains unidentified, and no infected animals have been detected since early 2023. Contact network tracing linked many farms to the index (outbreak) herd through cattle trade. The identified contact herds are still monitored for infection, and the possibility of a spread to other farm animals or wildlife cannot be excluded. Norway maintains strict regulations on live animal imports and monitors the presence of bTB through mandatory reporting, meat inspections, and breeding station testing. M. bovis can infect a wide variety of domestic and wildlife species. Furthermore, there is a significant public health concern due to its zoonotic potential. bTB is a chronic disease, and the incubation period can span from months to years. The bacterium can survive for months in the environment. Diagnosing bTB in live animals is challenging and time-consuming, implying that detection and eradication of the infection is difficult. Key Findings: Norway has had a very low number of imported cattle during the past 10 years. However, some imports of small ruminants and camelids (llamas, alpacas, camels) have occurred. Import of cattle and camelids from countries with bTB in the animal population is assessed as a risk of introducing the bacterium to Norwegian cattle. This risk assessment concludes that introduction of bTB to Norway from imported cattle is unlikely based on the current situation with low number of imports. However, introduction by camelids is regarded as more likely. There is significant domestic trade and transport of beef and dairy cattle within Norway, sometimes without proper registration. If bTB is established in the country, cattle movements are likely to spread the infection between herds. Furthermore, direct and indirect transmission to other domestic species or free-ranging animals (semi-domesticated reindeer and wildlife) may occur, which may complicate the control of bTB in outbreak regions. Indirect transmission can occur via contaminated feeds, pastures, and salt licks that are shared with free-ranging animals. Many species of free-ranging animals are susceptible to M. bovis. Depending on population density and other ecological factors, these species may play the role as hosts and a source of infection for cattle, other livestock and humans. Based on experience from Europe, M. bovis is considered as extremely difficult to eradicate in a country if established in free-ranging species. Badgers, cervid species (i.e. red deer, reindeer, roe deer, and moose), and a growing population of wild boars are of special concern. A contingency plan that takes into account the risk of spread to wild fauna may thus be crucial for successful control of an outbreak with bTB. In periods of severe drought, import of roughage to Norway may be necessary. It is uncertain how well different feed materials and ensiling methods will enable survival of M. bovis. Therefore, restricting import of roughage to Norway to countries and regions certified as officially tuberculosis free (OTF), will reduce the risk of introduction to Norwegian cattle. In the event of introduction and establishment of M. bovis to Norwegian cattle, slurry may pose a risk of spread to domestic and wild animals due to survival of the bacterium in liquid manure. Survival in slurry is uncertain; however, a minimum of six months storage before spreading or alternatively disinfection of slurry will reduce the risk. Zoonotic transmission of bTB remains a relatively rare event, also in countries where the infection is present in animal populations. However, M. bovis can be transmitted by direct contact between animals and humans, through handling (farmers, veterinarians, and slaughterhouse workers) carcasses, and indirectly by consumption of unpasteurised milk and dairy products, but rarely through consumption of meat and meat products. Meat inspection is the key measure for surveillance of bTB in cattle and other domestic animals. Diagnosing bTB is challenging due to the nature of the disease and the lack of a gold standard test. Test-positive animals may not show visible lesions postmortem, and sensitive methods like cultivation and PCR depend on the presence of bacteria in sampled tissues. Any test-strategy aiming to increase the possibility to detect latent infected animals will result in a higher number of culled animals where the infection cannot be confirmed. Too extensive testing in low-risk herds can lead to false positives and must be balanced against the financial costs of restrictions and culling. Combining different tests (skin test, IFN-γ test, and boosted antibody tests) improve sensitivity, and this strategy is particularly advised for imported animals and during outbreak investigations. To achieve the best sensitivity, one should apply the tuberculin test at the same time as the IFN-γ test, followed by serology 10-30 days after the tuberculin test. Culling testpositive animals, and retest after at least 60 days of animals with an inconclusive test will reduce the risk of introducing M. bovis to Norway. While tuberculin tests are labor-intensive and costly, they are regarded as the methods of choice for surveillance in endemic regions. Serological assays like Enferplex show promise for general surveillance, however, the sensitivity is relatively low without prior skin-test. Ongoing studies are evaluating the test performance in bulk-milk screening. In culled animals with suspected lesions, real-time PCR, alongside culture, is recommended for quicker diagnosis. Whole-genome sequencing is the preferred tool for molecular surveillance and outbreak investigations.
Abstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Erik J. JonerAbstract
No abstract has been registered
Authors
Cristina Micheloni Frank Willem Oudshoorn María Isabel Blanco Penedo Sari Autio Andrea Beste Jacopo Goracci Matthias Koesling Ursula Kretzschmar Eligio Malusá Maria Dolores Raigon Jimenez Bernhard Speiser Jan van der Blom Felix WäckersAbstract
The Expert Group for Technical Advice on Organic Production (EGTOP) was requested to advise on the use of several substances with plant protection or fertilising effects in organic production. The Group discussed whether the use of these substances and methods is in line with the objectives and principles of organic production, and whether they should be included in Regulation (EU) 2021/11652. Recommendations with respect to Annex II to Regulation (EU) (EU) 2021/1165: • The present entry for ‘stillage and stillage extract’ should be re-named ‘fermented plant materials such as vinasse or distillers grains’. The proportion of the total nitrogen present in the form of ammonium should be limited to maximum 30 % (by weight). • In the entries for ‘liquid animal excrements’, ‘composted or fermented bio-waste’ and ‘composted or fermented mixture of vegetable matter’, the term ‘fermented’ should be replaced by ‘digested’. • In the entry for ‘products and by-products of animal origin [...] hydrolysed proteins’, a restriction should be added to exclude production with alkalis or acids containing macronutrients (e.g. nitric or phosphoric acid, potassium hydroxide or ammonia). • In the entry for ‘hydrolysed proteins of plant origin’, a restriction should be added to exclude production with alkalis or acids containing macronutrients (e.g. nitric or phosphoric acid, potassium hydroxide or ammonia).
Authors
Cristina Micheloni Frank Willem Oudshoorn Sari Autio Andrea Beste María Isabel Blanco Penedo Jacopo Goracci Matthias Koesling Eligio Malusá Bernhard Speiser Jan van der Blom Felix Wäckers Ursula KretzschmarAbstract
The Expert Group for Technical Advice on Organic Production (EGTOP) was requested to advise on the use of several substances in organic production. The Group discussed whether the use of these substances is in line with the objectives and principles of organic production and whether they should therefore be included in Annex V of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1165.
Authors
Monica Sanden Eirill Ager-Wick Johanna Eva Bodin Nur Duale Anne-Marthe Ganes Jevnaker Kristian Prydz Volha Shapaval Ville Erling Sipinen Tage ThorstensenAbstract
The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM) has assessed an application for approval of soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii for food uses in the EU. In accordance with an assignment specified by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) and the Norwegian Environment Agency (NEA), VKM assesses whether genetically modified organisms (GMOs) intended for the European market can pose risks to human or animal health, or the environment in Norway. VKM assesses the scientific documentation regarding GMO applications seeking approval for use of GMOs as food and feed, processing, or cultivation. The EU Regulation 1829/2003/EC (Regulation) covers living GMOs that fall under the Norwegian Gene Technology Act, as well as processed food and feed from GMOs (dead material) that fall under the Norwegian Food Act. The regulation is currently not part of the EEA agreement or implemented in Norwegian law. Norway conducts its own assessments of GMO applications in preparation for the possible implementation of the Regulation. In accordance with the assignment by NFSA and NEA, VKM assesses GMO applications during scientific hearings initiated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as after EFSA has published its own risk assessment of a GMO, up until EU member countries vote for or against approval in the EU Commission. The assignment is divided into three stages. Soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii This application is submitted to gain authorisation for the use of soy leghemoglobin (the liquid preparation is referred to as “LegH Prep”) produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii (yeast) as a flavouring (“meaty taste”) in meat analogue products that will be marketed in the European Union (EU). Soy leghemoglobin is intended for addition to meat analogue products that are for use in foods such as burgers, meatballs, and sausages. Komagataella phaffii-strain employed in the production of soy leghemoglobin contains genetic modifications which allow it to express this protein. Following fermentation, the cells are lysed, and the soy leghemoglobin is concentrated by physical means. The soy leghemoglobin is delivered in a liquid preparation (LegH Prep) that is standardised to contain up to 9% soy leghemoglobin on a wet weight basis and a soy leghemoglobin protein purity of at least 65%. The remainder of the protein fraction in the LegH Prep is accounted for by residual proteins from the Komagataella phaffii production strain. These residual proteins are all endogenous to Komagataella phaffii as the gene coding for the expression of soy leghemoglobin is the only gene from a different organism. VKM has assessed the documentation in application EFSA-GMO- NL-2019-162 and EFSA's scientific opinion for the use of soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii. The scientific documentation provided in the application is adequate for risk assessment, and in accordance with the EFSA guidance on risk assessment of genetically modified microorganisms for use in food or feed. The VKM GMO Panel does not consider leghemoglobin from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii to imply potential specific health risks in Norway, compared to EU-countries. The EFSA opinion is adequate also for Norwegian considerations. Therefore, a full risk assessment was not performed by VKM. About the assignment: (...)
Authors
Monica Sanden Eirill Ager-Wick Johanna Eva Bodin Nur Duale Kristian Prydz Volha Shapaval Tage ThorstensenAbstract
The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM) has assessed an application for approval of soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii for food uses in the EU. In accordance with an assignment specified by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) and the Norwegian Environment Agency (NEA), VKM assesses whether genetically modified organisms (GMOs) intended for the European market can pose risks to human or animal health, or the environment in Norway. VKM assesses the scientific documentation regarding GMO applications seeking approval for use of GMOs as food and feed, processing, or cultivation. The EU Regulation 1829/2003/EC (Regulation) covers living GMOs that fall under the Norwegian Gene Technology Act, as well as processed food and feed from GMOs (dead material) that fall under the Norwegian Food Act. The regulation is currently not part of the EEA agreement or implemented in Norwegian law. Norway conducts its own assessments of GMO applications in preparation for the possible implementation of the Regulation. In accordance with the assignment by NFSA and NEA, VKM assesses GMO applications during scientific hearings initiated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as after EFSA has published its own risk assessment of a GMO, up until EU member countries vote for or against approval in the EU Commission. The assignment is divided into three stages. Soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii This application is submitted to gain authorisation for the use of soy leghemoglobin (the liquid preparation is referred to as “LegH Prep”) produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii (yeast) as a flavouring (“meaty taste”) in meat analogue products that will be marketed in the European Union (EU). Soy leghemoglobin is intended for addition to meat analogue products that are for use in foods such as burgers, meatballs, and sausages. Komagataella phaffii-strain employed in the production of soy leghemoglobin contains genetic modifications which allow it to express this protein. Following fermentation, the cells are lysed, and the soy leghemoglobin is concentrated by physical means. The soy leghemoglobin is delivered in a liquid preparation (LegH Prep) that is standardised to contain up to 9% soy leghemoglobin on a wet weight basis and a soy leghemoglobin protein purity of at least 65%. The remainder of the protein fraction in the LegH Prep is accounted for by residual proteins from the Komagataella phaffii production strain. These residual proteins are all endogenous to Komagataella phaffii as the gene coding for the expression of soy leghemoglobin is the only gene from a different organism. VKM has assessed the documentation in application EFSA-GMO- NL-2019-162 and EFSA's scientific opinion for the use of soy leghemoglobin produced from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii. The scientific documentation provided in the application is adequate for risk assessment, and in accordance with the EFSA guidance on risk assessment of genetically modified microorganisms for use in food or feed. The VKM GMO Panel does not consider leghemoglobin from genetically modified Komagataella phaffii to imply potential specific health risks in Norway, compared to EU-countries. The EFSA opinion is adequate also for Norwegian considerations. Therefore, a full risk assessment was not performed by VKM. About the assignment: (...)
Authors
Monica Sanden Eirill Ager-Wick Johanna Eva Bodin Nur Duale Anne-Marthe Ganes Jevnaker Kristian Prydz Volha Shapaval Ville Erling Sipinen Tage ThorstensenAbstract
The Norwegian Scientific Committee for Food and Environment (VKM) has assessed an application for approval of the genetically modified maize DP51291 for food and feed uses, import and processing in the EU. In accordance with an assignment specified by the Norwegian Food Safety Authority (NFSA) and the Norwegian Environment Agency (NEA), VKM assesses whether genetically modified organisms (GMOs) intended for the European market can pose risks to human or animal health, or the environment in Norway. VKM assesses the scientific documentation regarding GMO applications seeking approval for use of GMOs as food and feed, processing, or cultivation. The EU Regulation 1829/2003/EC (Regulation) covers living GMOs that fall under the Norwegian Gene Technology Act, as well as processed food and feed from GMOs (dead material) that fall under the Norwegian Food Act. The regulation is currently not part of the EEA agreement or implemented in Norwegian law. Norway conducts its own assessments of GMO applications in preparation for the possible implementation of the Regulation. In accordance with the assignment by NFSA and NEA, VKM assesses GMO applications during scientific hearings initiated by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), as well as after EFSA has published its own risk assessment of a GMO, up until EU member countries vote for or against approval in the EU Commission. The assignment is divided into three stages. Genetically modified maize DP51291 Genetically modified maize DP51291 (application GMFF-2021-0071) was developed via Agrobacterium tumefaciens mediated transformation. DP51291 plants contain the transgenes ipd072Aa and pat which encode the proteins IPD072Aa and PAT (phosphinothricin acetyltransferase). IPD072Aa confers protection against susceptible corn rootworm pests, and the PAT protein confers tolerance to glufosinate herbicide. The phosphomannose isomerase (PMI) protein that was used as a selectable marker. VKM has assessed the documentation in application GMFF-2021-0071 and EFSA's scientific opinion on genetically modified maize DP51291. VKM concludes that the applicant's scientific documentation for the genetically modified maize DP51291 is satisfactory for risk assessment, and in accordance with EFSA guidelines for risk assessment of genetically modified plants for food or feed uses. The genetic modifications in maize DP51291 do not indicate an increased health or environmental risk in Norway compared with EU countries. EFSA's risk assessment is therefore sufficient also for Norwegian conditions. As no specific Norwegian conditions have been identified regarding properties of the genetically modified maize DP51291, VKM's GMO panel has not performed a complete risk assessment of the maize. (...)