The Plant Alkaloid Camptothecin as a Novel Antifouling Compound for Marine Paints: Laboratory Bioassays and Field Trials
- 89 Downloads
The extensive use of copper and booster biocides in antifouling (AF) paints has raised environmental concerns and the need to develop new AF agents. In the present study, 18 alkaloids derived from terrestrial plants were initially evaluated for AF activity using laboratory bioassays with the bryozoan Bugula neritina and the barnacle Balanus albicostatus. The results showed that 4 of the 18 alkaloids were effective in inhibiting larval settlement of B. neritina, with an EC50 range of 6.18 to 43.11 μM, and 15 of the 18 alkaloids inhibited larval settlement of B. albicostatus, with EC50 values ranging from 1.18 to 67.58 μM. Field trials that incorporated five alkaloids respectively into paints with 20% w/w indicated an in situ AF efficiency of evodiamine, strychnine, camptothecin (CPT), and cepharanthine, with the most potent compound being CPT, which also exhibited stronger AF efficiency than the commercial antifoulants cuprous oxide and zinc pyrithione in the field over a period of 12 months. Further field trials with different CPT concentrations (0.1 to 20% w/w) in the paints suggested a concentration-dependent AF performance in the natural environment, and the effective concentrations to significantly inhibit settlement of biofoulers in the field were ≥ 0.5% w/w (the efficiency of 0.5% w/w lasted for 2 months). Moreover, CPT toxicity against the crustacean Artemia salina, the planktonic microalgae Phaeodactylum tricornutum and Isochrysis galbana, was examined. The results showed that 24 h LC50 of CPT against A. salina was 20.75 μM, and 96 h EC50 (growth inhibition) values of CPT to P. tricornutum and I. galbana were 55.81 and 6.29 μM, respectively, indicating that CPT was comparatively less toxic than several commercial antifoulants previously reported. Our results suggest the novel potential application of CPT as an antifoulant.
KeywordsAntifouling compound Camptothecin Alkaloid Biofouling Natural antifoulant
The authors would like to thank Xiamen Sunrui Ship Coating Co., Ltd. for permission to use their floating raft.
This research was supported by the National Marine Economic Development Demonstration Project in Xiamen under Grant 16CZB023SF12; the Public Science and Technology Research Funds Projects of Ocean of China under Grant 201305016; and the Open Fund of Key Laboratory of Integrated Marine Monitoring and Applied Technologies for Harmful Algal Blooms, State Oceanic Administration under Grant MATHAB201808.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- Artoxkit M (1990) Artemia toxicity screening test for estuarine and marine waters. Standard Operational Procedure. Creasel, DeinzeGoogle Scholar
- Chen PH (2006) Factors affecting the growth and settlement of barnacle Balanus albicostatus. PhD Thesis, Taiwan, National Sun Yat-sen UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Huang ZG, Cai RX (1984) Marine fouling organisms and their control, vol 1. Oceanic Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
- International Maritime Organization (IMO) (2008) International convention on the control of harmful anti-fouling systems on ships. International Maritime Organization, Adoption: 5 October 2001; Entry into force: 17 September 2008Google Scholar
- Kebede B, Wrigley SK, Prashar A, Rahlff J, Wolf M, Reinshagen J, Gribbon P, Imhoff JF, Silber J, Labes A, Ellinger B (2017) Establishing the secondary metabolite profile of the marine fungus: Tolypocladium geodes sp. MF458 and subsequent optimisation of bioactive secondary metabolite production. Mar Drugs 15:84CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Kulkarni AV, Patwardhan AA, Lele U, Malpathak NP (2010) Production of camptothecin in cultures of Chonemorpha grandiflora. Pharm Res 2:296–299Google Scholar
- Mayer FL Jr (1987) Acute toxicity handbook of chemicals to estuarine organisms. US Environmental Protection Agency, Gulf BreezeGoogle Scholar
- Mochida K, Fujii K (2009) Toxicity in plankton and fish. In: Arai T, Harino H, Ohji M, Langston WJ (eds) Ecotoxicology of antifouling biocideds. Springer, JapanGoogle Scholar
- Moodie LWK, Trepos R, Cervin G, Larsen L, Larsen DS, Pavia H, Hellio C, Cahill P, Svenson J (2017a) Probing the structure-activity relationship of the natural antifouling agent polygodial against both micro- and macrofoulers by semisynthetic modification. J Nat Prod 80:515–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Moodie LWK, Cervin G, Trepos R, Labriere C, Hellio C, Pavia H, Svenson J (2018) Design and biological evaluation of antifouling dihydrostilbene oxime hybrids. Mar Biotechnol 20:257–267Google Scholar
- Price ARG, Readman JW (2013) Booster biocide antifoulants: is history repeating itself? In: The European Environment Agency (ed) Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation. Part B—Emerging lessons from ecosystems. Publications Office of the European Union, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- Rittschof D (2001) Natural product antifoulants and coatings developments. In: JB MC, Baker BJ (eds) Marine chemical ecology. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
- Zeng M, Yu F, Wang L, Xu K (2009) Research progress on cultivation technique and alkali accumulation of Camptotheca acuminata Decne. J Anhui Agric Sci 37:16849–16850Google Scholar
- Zulkifli SZ, Aziz FZA, Ajis SZM, Ismail A (2014) Nauplii of brine shrimp (Artemia salina) as a potential toxicity testing organism for heavy metals contamination. In: Aris AZ, Tengku Ismail TH, Harun R, Abdullah AM, Ishak MY (eds) From sources to solution. Springer, SingaporeGoogle Scholar