Marine Biology

, Volume 102, Issue 4, pp 491–497 | Cite as

Interspecific differences in fouling of two congeneric ascidians (Eudistoma olivaceum and E. capsulatum): is surface acidity an effective defense?

  • A. R. Davis
  • A. E. Wright


Ascidian specimens were collected from the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, USA, in November 1987. Eudistoma olivaceum (Van Name) was fouled by only two species of epifaunal invertebrates and the percent cover of epibionts was negligible. Colonies of E. capsulatum (Van Name) were fouled by up to 17 species of epifaunal invertebrates, epibionts covered an average of 12.5% of the surface area of these colonies. Extracts of E. olivaceum exhibited potent cytotoxic, antimicrobial and antiviral activity in laboratory bioassays, while the activity of extracts of E. capsulatum was insignificant. The toxicity of extracts of each ascidian was negatively related to the percent cover of fouling organisms. Surface acidity of each ascidian was positively related to the percent cover of epibionts: E. olivaceum was nearly neutral (pH=6), while E. capsulatum was highly acidic (pH=1 to 2). Larval settlement and growth of ancestrulae of the cheilostome bryozoan Bugula neritina (Linnaeus) were inhibited at very low concentrations of crude extract of E. olivaceum. Crude extracts of E. capsulatum inhibited settlement and growth of B. neritina only at concentrations of approximately an order of magnitude greater than those of E. olivaceum. Differences in the degree to which these congeneric ascidians are fouled is related to differences in the chemical defenses they possess. Acidity is not an effective inhibitor of settlement by epifaunal invertebrates.


Toxicity Acidity Crude Extract Antiviral Activity Percent Cover 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature cited

  1. Alley, M. C., Scudiero, D. A., Monks, A., Hursey, M. L., Czerwinski, M. J., Fine, D. L., Abbot, B. J., Mayo, J. G., Shoemaker, R. H., Boyd, M. R. (1988). Feasibility of drug screening with panels of human tumor cell lines using a microculture tetrazolium assay. Cancer Res. 48: 589–601Google Scholar
  2. Bakus, G. J., Targett, N. M., Schulte, B. (1986). Chemical ecology of marine organisms: an overview. J. chem. Ecol. 12: 951–987Google Scholar
  3. Buss, L. W. (1979). Habitat selection, directional growth and spatial refuges: why colonial animals have more hiding places. In: Larwood, G., Rosen, B. R. (eds.) Biology and systematics of colonial organisms. Academic Press, London, p. 459–497Google Scholar
  4. Connell, J. H. (1985). The consequences of variation in initial settlement vs. post-settlement mortality in rocky intertidal communities. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 93: 11–45Google Scholar
  5. Crisp, D. J. (1984). Overview of research on marine invertebrate larvae. 1940–1980. In: Costlow, J. D., Tipper, R. C. (eds.) Marine biodeterioration: an interdisciplinary study. Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, USA, p. 103–126Google Scholar
  6. Davis, A. R. (1987). Variation in recruitment of the subtidal colonial ascidian Podoclavella cylindrica (Quoy and Gaimard: the role of substratum choice and early survival. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 106: 57–71Google Scholar
  7. Davis, A. R. (1988). Effects of variation in initial settlement on distribution and abundance of Podoclavella moluccensis Sluiter. J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol. 117: 157–167Google Scholar
  8. Davis, A. R., Wright, A. E. (1988). Ascidian antifouling defenses: surface acidity vs. secondary metabolits. Am. Zool. 28: p. 70AGoogle Scholar
  9. Dyrynda, P. E. J. (1986). Defensive strategie of modular organisms. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. (Ser. B) 313: 227–243Google Scholar
  10. Jackson, J. B. C. (1977). Competition on marine hard substrata: the adaptive significance of solitary and colonial strategies. Am. Nat. 111: 743–767Google Scholar
  11. Jackson, J. B. C., Buss, L. W. (1975). Allelopathy and spatial competition among coral reef invertebrates. Proc. natn. Acad. Sci. USA 72: 5160–5163Google Scholar
  12. Kinzer, K. F., Cardellina, J. H., II. (1987). Three new B-carbolines from the Bermudian tunicate Eudistoma olivaceum. Tetrahedron Lett. 28: 925–926Google Scholar
  13. Maki, J. S., Rittschof, D., Costlow, J. D., Mitchell, R. (1988). Inhibition of attachment of larval barnacles, Balanus amphitrite, by bacterial surface films. Mar. Biol. 97: 199–206Google Scholar
  14. McCaffrey, E. J., Endean, R. (1985). Antimicrobial activity of tropical and subtropical sponges. Mar. Biol. 89: 1–8Google Scholar
  15. Parry, D. L. (1984). Chemical properties of the test of ascidians in relation to predation. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 17: 279–282Google Scholar
  16. Rinehart, K. L., Jr., Kobayashi, J., Harbour, G. C., Gilmore, J., Mascal, M., Holt, T. G., Shield, L. S., Lafargue, F. (1987). Eudistomins A-Q, B-carbolines from the antiviral Caribbean tunicate Eudistoma olivaceum. J. Am. chem. Soc. 109: 3378–3387Google Scholar
  17. Rinehart, K. L., Jr., Kobayashi, J., Harbour, G. C., Hughes, Robert G., Jr., Mizsak, S. A., Scahill, T. A. (1984). Eudistomins C, E, K, and L, potent antiviral compounds containing a novel oxathiazepine ring from the Caribbean tunicate Eudistoma olivaceum. J. Am. chem. Soc. 106: 1524–1526Google Scholar
  18. Russell, W. C. (1962). A sensitive and precise plaque assay for Herpes virus. Nature, Lond. 195: 1028–1029Google Scholar
  19. Stoecker, D. (1978). Resistance of a tunicate to fouling. Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 155: 615–626Google Scholar
  20. Stoecker, D. (1980). Relationships between chemical defense and ecology in benthic ascidians. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 3: 257–265Google Scholar
  21. Thompson, J. E., Walker, R. P., Faulkner, D. J. (1985). Screening and bioassays for biologically-active substances from forty marine sponge species from San Diego, California, USA. Mar. Biol. 88: 11–21Google Scholar
  22. Ware, G. N. (1984). The patterns and mechanisms of antifouling in some temperate marine sponges. Thesis, Duke University, North Carolina, USAGoogle Scholar
  23. White, R. J., Maiese, W. M., Greenstein, M. (1986). Screening for new products from microorganisms. In: Demain, A. L., Solomon, N. A. (eds.) Manual of industrial microbiology. Chapter 2. American Society for Microbiology, Washington D.C., p. 24–31Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. R. Davis
    • 1
  • A. E. Wright
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Marine ScienceHarbor Branch Oceanographic InstitutionFort PierceUSA
  2. 2.Division of Biomedical Marine ResearchHarbor Branch Oceanographic InstitutionFort PierceUSA

Personalised recommendations