sign in sign up
<<
Home , Biofouling

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 8 Number 01 (2019) Journal homepage: http://www.ijcmas.com

Review Article https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.807.365

Review on Impact of Biofouling in Aquafarm Infrastructures

S. Archana*, B. Sundaramoorthy and M. Mohamed Faizullah

Dr. M.G.R. Fisheries College and Research Institute, Tamilnadu Dr. J. Jayalalithaa Fisheries University, India

*Corresponding author

ABSTRACT

K e yw or ds The biofouling issue is a tenacious issue throughout the history of farming in the world, however it has elevated in priority as labour and electricity costs have arisen in Aquaculture, recent years. Besides, development is frequently fast on the grounds that the waters Antifouling paint, encompassing aquaculture activities are enhanced by natural and inorganic squanders Fouling, Coating, (uneaten food, fecal and excretory material) created by high-density fish populations. The Non-coating, large surface area and structure of mesh material, especially multifilament mesh, is Infrastructures exceptionally appropriate for colonization and development of fouling. Biofouling of fish- Article Info cage netting is a critical operational issue to aquaculture. The occlusion of mesh and the

subsequent limitation in water exchange adversely influences fish health by the reduction Accepted: in dissolved oxygen (DO) and the accumulation of metabolic ammonia. Fouling is also 26 December 2018

Available Online: reducing the cage floatation, cage deformation, increases structural fatigue, and may go 10 January 2019 about as a supply for pathogens. The effects of fouling differ significantly relying upon season and area, and are additionally impacted by cultivating techniques and practices. The impacts of these factors are reviewed and highlighted. Suggesting an effective biofouling control will help to develop non- toxic coating particularly suited for aquaculture

applications in future.

Introduction serve as a base for the growth of macrofouling, which consists of , and Any artificial or natural substance get in invertebrates such as , , contact with water environment become ascidians and hydroids. colonised by marine organisms, a process which is called biofouling (Railkin, 2004). Now a day, biofouling is a major biosecurity Within minutes of immersion, a surface risk for the aquaculture industry, which becomes ‘conditioned’ through the includes direct impacts on cultures species of macromolecules such as , present (e.g. smothering, competition for space and in the water. Bacteria colonise within hours as food), deterioration of farm infrastructure may unicellular , protozoa and fungi. (immersed structures such as cages, netting These early colonisers form a , which and pantoons) and effects on natural is an assemblage of attached organisms that is ecosystem functioning of adjacent areas. often referred to as microfouling or slime

2942

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

The production infrastructure for the species microtexture, novel materials approaches. The in variably consists of a complex assortment use of biocidal coatings with persistent or of submerged components with aerators, broadly toxic active ingredients, such as pipes, cages, nets, floats and ropes. All of or organic toxins, may have govt. these structures serve as surfaces for approval issues for the enclosed or semi- biofouling. The presence of such varied enclosed water bodies of marine pond farms surfaces provides for a broad diversity of and is not a preferred option for farmers. So epibiotic organisms to settle and grow. These prevention of biofouling using eco-friendly marine algae and , are severely method is suggesting control options for problematic to culture operations and can aquafarm. have significant economic impacts. Conservative estimates of around 5-10% is Impacts of biofouling in aquaculture attributed to biofouling which directly affects structures the economic costs of control in aquaculture (Lane Willemsen, 2004). Globally, this Biofouling is a significant issue for all forms equates to costs of US$ 1.5 to 3 billion/yr. To of aquaculture operating in the marine and minimize these impacts, the aquaculture brackish water environment for aquaculture industry uses technologies to manage and activities such as shellfish and finfish control fouling communities. farming. The culture structures used for both and in the case of shellfish, the hard shell of The composition of fouling communities and the animals themselves, are severely impacted their effect in marine aquaculture is largely by biofouling and the industries need to dictated by the properties of the fouling employ a variety of approaches to control surface, and the protection and management production limiting affects. A survey of of these surfaces is the key to biofouling shellfish culture operations in the USA put the control. Currently there is a substantial cost of controlling biofouling at 14.7% of amount of information on the mechanisms of total operating costs (Adams, et al., 2011). biofouling and an array of options are Manual cleaning of fish cages and shellfish available that have shown promise in structures continues to be the most common combating the problem for specific marine control measure (Adams, et al., 2011). applications, eg and boat fouling Biofouling is a specific problem in aquafarms prevention, electricity generator coolant water mainly damaging the infrastructures and intake pipes, bivalve aquaculture structures in major key impacts are restricting the water inshore waters, fish cage farms. Biofouling on exchange, increase disease risk and causes marine pond farms has received little, if any, deformation of structures (Fitridge., et al attention so that currently the primary means 2012). Biofouling adds significant weight and of dealing with fouling is manual cleaning. drag to shell fish culture infrastructure, The approach taken to control biofouling is rapidly becoming a management issue. regular manual defouling as required and it is anticipated that a preventative approach The Effect of Biofouling in aeration devices would be more cost effective and reliable and rises the cost of production through electricity provide significant farm management consumption, increased maintenance cost and benefits. A broad range of antifouling options labour cost. It has been estimated that the are now commercially available or being current drawn by paddle wheels can be up to developed, including: - chemical, biological, 50% greater when heavily fouled. One farm electrical, ultrasound irradiation, surface estimated that on average across the farm

2943

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953 power consumption was increased by 20% maintenance and loss of equipment directly and 50% extra maintenance and repair cost contributes to production costs for the due to fouling. Aerator surfaces that are industry. typically subject to fouling are generally stainless steel and plastic. By far the greatest Cleaning oyster cultures is estimated to be wetted surface area of paddlewheels and other 20% of the market value and biofouling can aerators are plastics, particularly high density reduce growth rates by over 40%. The polyethylene (HDPE) which is used to estimated cost of fouling on cultured mussels construct the floats and the motor cover. in Scotland is ± 450-750.000 Euro per year HDPE has some inherent fouling control for farmers, and the problem is worsening properties as a result of its surface (Campbell and Kelly, 2002). characteristics but this does not prevent colonization. Even under ideal conditions Control of biofouling in aquaculture HDPE can only restrict the adhesive strength of foulants such as barnacles, tubeworms and Unlike other industries where biofouling is a algae. Biofouling reduce the efficiency of problem, such as shipping, few studies have oxygen transfer in aquafarms (Mann, 2011). examined the impact and sought cost- In the aquafarms, it is found that the fouling effective solutions for the aquaculture on cage netting greatly reduce the efficiency industry. The most common methods to (Willemsen. 2003). The costs associated with control the problem are mechanical cleaning biofouling can be very significant (Beaz et al., or using antifouling coatings. 2005). The replacement of nets is expensive, annual costs to replace nets and reapply Mechanical cleaning, involving brushing, antifouling for a medium-sized UK salmon scraping or cleaning using water jets, is farm is estimated to be ±€ 120.000. labour intensive and tedious (Hodson et al., Biofouling growth on fish cages and 1997). Air/sun drying when nets or oysters infrastructure has three main negative effects: are hoisted out of the water and desiccation or heat kills but does not remove fouling. Restriction of water exchange due to the Cleaning of shellfish can be combined with growth of fouling organisms causing net immersing the biofouled shellfish in either hot occlusion. When fish are held in high density or fresh-water, chlorine, salt solution or lime in net pens, this leads to poor water quality as (Arakawa, 1980). The stress of the immersion flushing is reduced. Lowered dissolved medium kills the fouling. oxygen levels result and the removal of excess feed and waste is inhibited; Applying a biocidal coating on the surface is still widely used in aquaculture. Net coatings Disease risk due to fouling communities are usually low-tech versions of coatings for acting as reservoirs for pathogenic vessels. Small amounts of the active harboured by macro- or substance are released to deter or kill the microbial fouling species on cage netting, or fouling. The lifetime of such coatings, mostly lowered dissolved oxygen levels from poor based on copper oxide (Cu2O), is limited to water exchange increasing the stress levels of one season, while the costs for treating nets fish, lowering immunity and increasing are high. vulnerability to disease. Antifoulants are known sources of pollution Cage deformation and structural fatigue due from aquaculture and are responsible for to the extra weight imposed by fouling. The elevated levels of copper close to fish-farms. 2944

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

In addition to Cu2O, organic biocides with (Carver et al., 2003). These methods are only improved environmental profiles (e.g. being used locally or are under development. biodegradable) are available (Costello et al., Biofouling persists as a significant practical 2001), but these are generally not targeted at and economic barrier to the development of the aquaculture industry. Fouling prevention competitive aquaculture and there is a need strategies for culture equipment such as ropes, for cost effective, sustainable solutions to the floats, panels, nets and trays have traditionally fouling problem. The antifouling sector, used heavy metals including copper, nickel mainly fulfilling the needs of the shipping and . Unlike and nickel, copper industry, has for decades undertaken a great based coatings remain in use despite their deal of research into developing toxic and negative impacts on developing vertebrates non-toxic antifouling strategies. Virtually and invertebrates (Oliva et al., 2007), and none of this work has considered the specific their ability to concentrate in shellfish tissues needs and issues related to aquaculture. It will (Chang sheng et al., 1990). Environmental proof fruitful to utilize this knowledge base to problems associated with commonly used develop sustainable and environmental benign biocides have led to increasingly restrictive approaches to reducing the biofouling legislation and the banning of some problem within aquaculture. compounds for use on vessels and in aquaculture, most notably TBT (IMO, 2002) Natural antifouling methods and in some member states copper, Irgarol and Diuron. The negative and significant impacts that biofouling has on viability and profitability of When fish net cages impregnated with toxic aquaculture has necessitated a long and coatings do become fouled they need to be persistent effort in biofouling control. removed and cleaned. This costly process Historically, the aquaculture industry has causes stress to the fish resulting in mortality borrowed antifouling (AF) technologies from (estimated at 2%). Net washing have other marine industries which focus on problems dealing with the copper containing chemical AF technologies. AF paints to waste and sludge. The waste must be control biofouling are commonly used on specially disposed of and such safeguards surfaces in marine transport, oil and gas evidently increase costs. Some other industries (Yebra et al., 2004; de Nys and antifouling methods certainly exist, examples Guenther 2009; Durr and Watson 2010). of which are biological control using grazers These paints leach biocidal compounds such (Hidu et al., 1981; Lodeiros and Garcia, as heavy metals and organic biocides onto the 2004); avoidance when cultures are removed surface, producing a thin, toxic layer which or repositioned during periods of heavy prevents the onset of biofouling. However, fouling settlement (Rikard et al., 1996); new many of the chemicals and heavy metals materials (coatings) such as silicone based involved are recognized as dangerous in the fouling-release coatings (Baum et al., 2002), environment, with detrimental effects on the generally in combination with mechanical survival and growth of shellfish (Paul and cleaning (Hodson et al., 2000) or coatings for Davies 1986; reviewed by Fent 2006) and fish netting (McCloy and De Nys, 2000; De Nys (Lee et al., 1985; Short and Thrower 1986; et al., 2004); new cage designs to limit Bruno and Ellis 1988) and this has prompted fouling on shellfish or fish net cages (Menton an effort to prevent or mitigate biofouling in and Allen, 1991); and spraying with an aquaculture through alternative methods. antifouling solution such as acetic acid

2945

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

Natural product antifoulants (NPAs) are which good number of antifouling molecules globally accepted and one of the most were reported in the literature (Mayzel et al., promising environmentally benign option to 2014; Trepos et al., 2014). Antifouling control marine biofouling. After the ban of activities were also reported from , TBT based antifouling paints and seagrasses, (De nys et al., 1995; Helio et al., environmental concerns associated with other 2002), bryozoans (Walls et al., 1993; Kon- toxic biocides, there is a growing need for the yaet al., 1994), mangroves and effective eco-friendly antifoulants for marine microorganisms (Burgesset al., 1999; applications (Yanget al., 2007; Bao et al., Kennedy et al., 2009; Satheesh et al., 2012; 2013). Research interest on natural product Viju et al., 2014). antifoulants has been increased in the recent years that were evident from the growing Few antifouling coatings based on natural number publications (Bao et al., 2013; Keifer, products from the marine organisms such as PA and KL. Renillafoulins Rinehart, 1986). In Sea Nine- 211, Netsafe and Pearlsafe have nature, many marine sessile organisms are already been commercialized (Jacobson and keeping their surfaces free from fouling Willingham, 2000; De Nys et al., 2004). organisms (Renillafoulins Rinehart, 1986; During the past five decades’ bioactive Yang et al., 2006) mainly through the metabolites from the marine environment production of secondary metabolites attracted the attention of researchers all over (Hentschel et al., 2001, Pawlik et al., 2012). the world for the discovery of lead The secondary metabolites produced by many compounds in medicine and industry (Jones et marine organisms that showed inhibitory al., 2007; Dunlap et al., 2007; Devi et al., activities against the biofouling organisms 2010; Mayer et al., 2011; Felczy kowska et would be the ideal lead molecules for the al., 2012; Cong et al., 2014; Cortes et al., development of natural product antifoulants 2014). Due to the concern on exploitation of that can be incorporated into paints (Clare, large amount of marine organisms for natural 1996, Feng et al., 2009). products discovery, marine microbes are considered as the viable source for searching The compounds belonging to terpenoids, bioactive molecules. Many novel bioactive steroids, carotenoids, phenolics, furanones, metabolites with antifouling activities were alkaloids, peptides and lactones extracted reported from marine microbes in the from the marine organisms showed literature (Egan et al., 2002; Bhattarai et al., antifouling activities (Feng et al,2009). 2007; Bowman, 2007; Ortega-Morales et al., Among the marine organisms, antifouling 2008; Soliey et al., 2011). Sessile soft-bodied activities were largely reported from marine organisms are having inherent and corals (Hellio et al., 2005; Limna mol et antifouling property, i.e. they produce al., 2010; Dobrestov et al., 2015; Taylor et secondary metabolites as a chemical means of al., 2007). Sponges especially attracted the warfare, protection from predation, attention of the researchers due to their close competition for space, prevention of over relationship with wide variety of microbes growth/ biofouling, combat poisoning and and presence of large number of biologically fight infections. Thus there is an intense active secondary metabolites (Taylor et al., research activity to seek novel, 2007).Another important group attracted the environmentally benign methods of fouling attention of investigators is the ascidians from control.

2946

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

Biofouling in Paddlewheel aerator

Biofouling in floating cage

One of the antifouling technique (spray coating using copper)

2947

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

Antifouling strategy/technology

Non-coating

Vibration (low / high Electrochemical/Electrical Cleaning in water/ on frequency) land

Removal of setting Boat wash stages from water Dissolute/

ex. Using attractants Precipitate copper Robot technology Surface charge UV-C radiation Natural grazers Manual brushing Electrolysis Air drying (Cl/H2O-productie)

Biocide injection

High pressure Magnetic/electrical jetting forces

Coating

Based on leaching Non-leaching of active ingredient

Metallic layers

Organo-metallic Biocides Non-toxic' Fouling-release Other coating actives coatings

Fast polishing Metal Copper oxide Enzymes Silicone PDMS cladding

Contact activity Natural Organic Fluor-silicones compounds biocides Removable foils ‘Living’ coatings Nanotechnology based materials (micro-organisms producing actives) On demand systems (on/off)

'Spiky' coatings

Surfaces with defined micro-structures

Hydrogels

2948

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

In conclusion the occurrence of biofouling in business and economic implications of aquaculture is an important management issue mitigation. J World Aquacult Soc, 42: resulting in increased operational expenses 242–252. and detrimental impacts on the species being Arakawa, K, 1980. Prevention and removal of cultured. Surprisingly, for an issue with such fouling on cultured oysters: a high impact in a growing global industry, handbook for growers. Maine Sea scanty information exists on its effects and Grant Technical Report No. 56. costs. The expansion of tropical aquaculture Bao, J., YL. Sun, XY. Zhang, Z. Han, HC. and the trend towards greater use of offshore Gao, and He. F, 2013 Antifouling and sites both present new challenges in antibacterial polyketides from marine understanding the impacts of fouling and gorgonian coral-associated implementing successful control measures. Penicillium sp. SCSGAF0023. J Given the limited choice of products currently Antibiot. 66:219 – 23. available, quantitative studies on the spatial Beaz. D., V. Beaz, S. Dürr, J. Icely, A. Lane, and temporal variation of fouling species, and J. Thomason, D. Watson, and farm management on fouling development, Willemsen, P.R, 2005. Sustainable are essential to assist the industry to choose Solutions for Biofouling the most cost effective and practical methods in Europe. ASLO Meeting, Santiago for fouling control, both now and into the da Compostela, Spain. future. In terms of control, the mechanical Bhattarai, HD., V.S. Ganti, B. Paudel, Y.K. removal of biofouling remains dominant in Lee, H.K. Lee, and Hong. Y.K. 2007. shellfish and fish culture, and copper coatings Isolation of antifouling compounds on fish nets are the only consistently effective from the marine bacterium, form of biofouling prevention at an industrial Shewanella oneidensis SCH0402. scale. Further developments need to rely of World J Microbiol Biotechnol. incremental improvements in these 23:243–9. technologies by effective environmentally Bowman, JP. 2007. Bioactive compound benign method of control biofouling in synthetic capacity and ecological aquaculture. Using of biocides as an significance of marine bacterial genus antifouling is making organisms to suffer in Pseudoalteromonas. Mar Drugs. many ways instead of that environmentally 5:220 – 41. benign antifouling method is more valuable Bruno, D.W. and Ellis. A.E, 1988. for aquaculture farm industries. Therefore, Histopathological effects in Atlantic while the aquaculture industry remains a step salmon, Salmo salar L., attributed to behind other maritime industries in control the use of tributyltin antifoulant. methods it can also benefit from the broader Aquaculture 72:15–20 research effort across maritime industries to Burgess, JG., Jordan, E. M Bregu, M. A. solve a cosmopolitan, persistent and complex Mearns-Spragg, and Boyd K.G. 1999. problem, biofouling. Microbial antagonism: A neglected avenue of natural products research. J References Biotechnol. 70:27 – 32 Campbell, D.A. and Kelly M.S, 2002. Adams, CM., Shumway S.E. Whitlach R.B, Settlement of Pomatoceros triqueter and Getchis. T, 2011. Biofouling in (L.) in two Scottish Lochs, and factors marine molluscan shellfish determining its abundance on mussels aquaculture: a survey assessing the grown in suspended culture. J

2949

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

Shellfish Res, 21: 519–527. Yebra D, editors. Advances in marine Carver, C.E.,A. Chisholm, and. Mallet. A.L., antifouling coatings and technologies. 2003. Strategies to mitigate the impact Cambridge (UK): Woodhead of Ciona intestinalis (L.) biofouling Publishing Ltd. p. 177–221. on shellfish production. J Shellfish De Nys, R. and Ison, O. 2004. Evaluation of Res, 22:621–631. antifouling products developed for the Clare, A.S. 1998. Towards non-toxic Australian pearl industry. Project No antifouling. J Mar Biotechnol 6:3. 2000/254. Final Report to the Clare, AS.,1996. Marine natural product Fisheries Research and Development antifoulants: Status and potential. Corporation. Townsville (Qld): James Biofouling. 9:211–29 Cook University. 114 pp. Cong, L., W. Liang, Y. Wu, C. Li, Y. Chang, De Nys, R., PD. Steinberg, P. Willemsen, SA. and Dong. L. 2014. High-level soluble Dworjanyn, CL. Gabelish, and King. expression of the functional peptide RJ, 1995. Broad spectrum effects of derived from the C-terminal domain of secondary metabolites from the red the sea cucumber lysozyme and algae Delisea pulchra in antifouling analysis of its antimicrobial activity. assays. Biofouling. 8: 259–71. Electron J Biotechnol. 17: 280 – 286. De Nys, R.C., P. Steinberg, T.S. Charlton, Cortés, Y., E. Hormazábal, H. Leal, A. Urzúa, and Christov. V. 2004. Antifouling of A. Mutis, and Parra. L., 2014. Novel shellfish and aquaculture apparatus. antimicrobial activity of a Unisearch Limited, US, p 32. dichloromethane extract obtained from Devi, P., S. Wahidullah, C. Rodrigues, and red seaweed Ceramium rubrum Souza. LD. 2010. The - (Hudson) (Rhodophyta: associated bacterium Bacillus Florideophyceae) against Yersinia licheniformis SAB1: A source of ruckeri and Saprolegnia parasitica, antimicrobial compounds. Mar Drugs. agents that cause diseases in 8:1203 – 12. salmonids. Electron J Biotechnol. Dobretsov, S., ASM. Al-Wahaibi, D. Lai, J. 17:126–31. Al-Sabahi, M. Claereboudt, and Costello, M.J.,A. Grant,I.M, Davies, S. Proksch. P. 2015. Inhibition of Cecchini,S. Papoutsoglou,D.Quigley, bacterial fouling by soft coral natural and M. Saroglia, M (2001) The products. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad. control of chemicals used in 98:53–8. aquaculture in Europe. J Appl Dunlap, W.C., CN. Battershill, CH. Liptrot, Ichthyol., 17:173-180. RE. Cobb, DG. Bourne, and Jaspars.. De Nys, R and Ison. O, 2004. Evaluation of M 2007. Biomedicinals from the antifouling products developed for the phytosymbionts of marine Australian pearl industry. Fisheries invertebrates: A molecular approach. Research and Development Method.42:358 –76. Corporation; 2004. Cooper EL. Drug Durr, S. and Watson. D.I 2010. Biofouling discovery, CAM and natural products. and antifouling in aquaculture. In: Evid Based Complement Alternat Durr S, Thomason JC, editors. Med. 1:215–7. Biofouling. Oxford (UK): Wiley- De Nys, R. and Guenther. J. 2009. The impact Blackwell. p. 267–287. and control of biofouling in marine Egan, S., S. James, C. Holmström, and finfish aquaculture. In: Hellio C, Kjelleberg. S, 2002. Correlation

2950

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

between pigmentation and antifouling 2001. Isolation and phylogenetic compounds produced by analysis of bacteria with antimicrobial Pseudoalteromonas . Environ activities from the Mediterranean Microbiol. 4:433. sponges Aplysina aerophoba and FAO. 2010. The state of world fisheries and Aplysina cavernicola. FEMS aquaculture, Food and Agriculture Microbiol Ecol. 35:305–12. Organization of the United Nations. Hidu, H., C. Conary, and Chapman. S.R. Felczykowska, A., SK. Bloch, B. Nejman- 1981. Suspended culture of oysters: Faleńczyk, and Barańska. biological fouling control. Metagenomic, S.2012. approach in the Aquaculture, 22:189-192. investigation of new bioactive Hodson, S.L.,C.M, Burke, and Bissett. A.P. compounds in the marine 2000. Biofouling of fishcage netting: environment. Acta Biochim Pol. 59: the efficacy of a silicone coating and 501 –5. the effect of netting colour. Feng, D., C. Ke, S. Li, C. Lu, and Guo. F, Aquaculture, 184:277–290 2009. Pyrethroids as promising marine Hodson, S.L.,T.E, Lewis, and Burke. C.M. antifoulants: Laboratory and field 1997. Biofouling of fishcage netting: studies. Mar Biotechnol. 11: 153– 60. efficacy and problems of in situ Fent, K. 2006. Worldwide occurrence of cleaning. Aquaculture, 152:77–90. organotins from antifouling paints and IMO. International Maritime Organization, effects in the aquatic environment. In: Antifouling Systems. Konstantinou I, editor. Antifouling Jacobson, A.H. and Willingham. G.L. 2000. paint biocides. The Handbook of Sea-nine antifoulant: An Environmental Chemistry 5.0. Berlin environmentally acceptable alternative (Germany): Springer-Verlag. p. 71– to organotin antifoulants. Sci Total 100. Environ. 258:103–10. Fitridgea, I., T. Dempstera, J. Guentherb, and Jones, P., M.T. Cottrell, DL. Kirchman, and de Nysc, R. 2012. The impact and Dexter. S.C, 2007. Bacterial control of biofouling in marine community structure of bio films on aquaculture: a review. Biofouling, 28 artificial surfaces in an estuary. (7): 649–669. Microb Ecol. 53:153–62. Hellio, C., J.P. Bergé, C. Beaupoil, Y. Le Gal, Keifer, PA. and Renillafoulins Rinehart, K.L. and Bourgougnon. N.2002. Screening 1986. Antifouling diterpenes from the of marine algal extracts for anti- sea pansy Renilla reniformis settlement activities against (Octocorallia). J Org Chem. 51:4450 – microalgae and macroalgae. 4. Biofouling. 18:205 –15. Kennedy, J., P. Baker, C. Piper, P.D. Cotter, Hellio, C., M. Tsoukatou, J. Marechal, N. M. Walsh, M.J, and Mooij.2009. Aldred, C. Beaupoil, and. Clare. A.S. Isolation and analysis of bacteria with 2005. Inhibitory effects of antimicrobial activities from the Mediterranean sponge extracts and marine sponge Haliclona simulans metabolites on larval settlement of the collected from Irish waters. Mar Balanus amphitrite. Mar Biotechnol. 11: 384 – 96. Biotechnol. 7:297–305. Kon-ya, K., N. Shimidzu, and Adachi Hentschel, U., M.S. chmid, M. Wagner, L. Miki.W, 1994. 2,5,6-Tribromo-1- Fieseler, C. Gernert, and Hacker. J. methylgramine, an antifouling

2951

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

substance from the marine bryozoans Fisheries N (ed) Flat Oyster Zoobrotryon pellucidum. FishSci. Workshop, Sydney, p 19-23. 60:773 –5 Menton, D.J. and Allen. J.H. 1991. Spherical Lane,A. and Willemsen. P.R, 2004. (Kiel) and square steel cages: first Collaborative effort looks into year of comparative evaluations at St biofouling. Int 2004: Andrews, NB. Bull Aquacult Assoc 34–35. Canada, 91:111–113. Lee, H.B., L.C, Lim, and Cheong. L, 1985. Oliva, M., M.D, Carmen Garrido Perez, E. Observations on the use of antifouling Gonzalez De, and Canales. M.L, 2007. paint in net cage fish farming in Evaluation of acute copper toxicity Singapore. Singapore J Primary Ind during early life stages of gilthead, 13:1–12. Sparus aurata. J Environ Sci Health A Limna Mol, V.P., TV. Raveendran, K.R. 42:525–533. Abhilash, and. Parameswaran. P.S. Ortega-Morales, B.O., M.J. Chan-Bacab, E. 2010. Inhibitory effect of Indian Miranda-Tello, M.L. Fardeau, J.C. sponge extracts on bacterial strains Carrero, and Stein. T, 2008. and larval settlement of the barnacle, Antifouling activity of sessile bacilli Balanus amphitrite. Int Biodeterior derived from marine surfaces. J Ind Biodegrad. 64:506 –10. Microbiol Biotechnol 35:9 –15. Lodeiros, C. and Garcıa. N. 2004. The use of Paul, J.D. and, Davies. I.M, 1986. Effects of sea urchins to control fouling during copper and tin-based antifoulant on suspended culture of bivalves. the growth of cultivated scallops Aquaculture, 231: 293–298. (Pecten maximus) and oyster Mann, K.V. 2011. Theoretical perspectives in (Crassostrea gigas). Aquaculture, 54: medical education: past experience 191–203. and future possibilities. Med Educ., Pawlik, J. R., 2012. Antipredatory defensive 45(1):60-80. roles of natural products from marine Mayer, A.M.S., A.D. Rodríguez, R.G.S. invertebrates. In: E. Fattorusso, WH. Berlinck, and Fusetani., N, 2011. Gerwick, and O. Taglialatela-Scafati, Marine pharmacology in2007–8: editors. Handbook of marine natural Marine compounds with antibacterial, products. NY: Springer. 677 –710. anticoagulant, antifungal, anti- Railkin, AI. 2004. Marine biofouling: inflammatory, antimalarial, colonization process and defenses. antiprotozoal, antituberculosis, and ISBN 0-8493-1419-4. CRC Press antiviral activities; affecting the Ribeiro. SM., R. Rogers, AC. Rubem, BAP. immune and nervous system, and Da Gama, G. Muricy, and Pereira. RC. other miscellaneous mechanisms of 2013. Antifouling activity of twelve action. Comp Biochem Physiol Part demo sponges from Brazil. Braz J C: Toxicol Pharmacol 153:191 –222. Biol. 73:501–6 Mayzel, B., M. Haber, and. Ilan. M, 2014. Rikard, F.S.and R.K, Wallace and Nelson, Chemical defense against fouling in C.L, 1996. Management strategies for the solitary ascidian Phallusia nigra. fouling control in Alabama oyster Biol Bull. 227:232–41. culture. J Shellf Res, 15:529 McCloy, S. and De Nys. R. 2000. Novel Satheesh, S., A.R. Soniyamby, C.V. Sunjaiy Technologies for the reduction of Shankar, and Punitha. S.M.J, 2012. biofouling in shellfish aquaculture. In: Antifouling activities of marine

2952

Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci (2019) 8(1): 2942-2953

bacteria associated with the sponge SMJ, 2014. Antibiofilm activities of (Sigmodocia sp). J Ocean Univ China. extracellular polymeric substances 11:354 – 60. produced by bacterial symbionts of Sera, Y., K. Adachi, F. Nishida, and Shizuri. seaweeds. Indian J Geo-Mar Sci. 43:1 Y, 1999. A new sesquiterpene as an – 11. antifouling substance from a Palauan Wahl, M., PR. Jensen, and Fenical. W, 1994. marine sponge, Dysidea herbacea. J Chemical control of bacterial epibiosis Nat Prod. 62: 395 – 6. on ascidians. Mar Ecol Prog Ser. Short, J.W. and Thrower, F.P, 1986. 110:45 – 57. Accumulation of butyltin in of Walls, JT., DA. Ritz, and Blackman. AJ. Chinook salmon reared in sea pens 1993. Fouling, surface bacteria and treated with tri-n-butyltin. Mar Pollut antibacterial agents of four bryozoans’ Bull, 17:542–545 species found in Tasmania, Australia. Soliev, AB., K. Hosokawa, and Enomoto. K, J Exp Mar Biol Ecol. 169:1–13. 2011. Bioactive pigments from marine Yang, L.H., L. Miao, O.O.Lee, X.Li, bacteria: Applications and H.Xiong, and Pang. K.L., 2007. Effect physiological roles. Evid Based of culture conditions on antifouling Complement Alternat Med. 2011:1– compound production of a sponge- 17. associated fungus. Appl Microbiol Taylor, MW., R. Radax, D. Steger, and Biotechnol. 74:1221–31 Wagner. M, 2007. Sponge-associated Yang, L.H., OO.Lee, T.Jin, X.C.Li, and Qian, microorganisms: Evolution, ecology, P.Y. 2006. Antifouling properties of and biotechnological potential. 10 β-formamidokalihinol-A and Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 71:295-47. kalihinol A isolated from the marine Trepos, R., G. Cervin, C. Hellio, H. Pavia, W. sponge Acanthella cavernosa. Stensen, and Stensvåg. K, 2014. Biofouling. 22:23–32. Antifouling compounds from the sub- Yebra, D.M.,S. Kiil, and. Dam-Johansen. K, arctic ascidian Synoicum pulmonaria: 2004. Antifouling technology – past, Synoxazolidinones A and C, present and future steps towards pulmonarins A and B, and synthetic efficient and environmentally friendly analogues. J Nat Prod.77: 2105 –13. antifouling coatings. Prog Org Coat Viju, N., A. Anitha, S. Sharmin Vini, CV. 50: 75–104. Sunjaiy Shankar, S. Satheesh, Punitha.

How to cite this article:

Archana, S., B. Sundaramoorthy and Mohamed Faizullah, M. 2019. Review on Impact of Biofouling in Aquafarm Infrastructures. Int.J.Curr.Microbiol.App.Sci. 8(01): 2942-2953. doi: https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2019.807.365

2953