Toxicity in Plankton and Fish

  • Kazuhiko Mochida
  • Kazunori Fujii

Organotin compounds have been strictly regulated in many countries for the last two decades because of their severe toxic effects on marine organisms (Fent 1996). Consequently, new antifouling biocides that substitute for organotin compounds have been developed. Many studies have surveyed the occurrence of these biocides in the environment. Diuron and Irgarol 1051 (herbicides used in popular slime-resistant antifouling paints) have been detected in environmental water samples from several European countries, the United States, various Caribbean countries, and Japan (Thomas et al. 2000, 2002; Konstantinou and Albanis 2004; Harino et al. 2005b; Carbery et al. 2006). The occurrence of pyrithiones (PTs), such as copper (CuPT) and zinc pyrithione (ZnPT), in the aquatic environment has only recently been reported; Harino et al. (2006) first detected CuPT in sediment from coastal northern Vietnam and, subsequently, in Otsuchi Bay, Japan (Harino et al. 2006, 2007).

Thus, it is clear that these alternative biocides are already in widespread use. The toxicity of these alternative biocides to various marine organisms has already been examined, as described below, but in view of the need to maintain wild populations of marine organisms, it is necessary to clarify the adverse effects of these alterna-tive biocides. Indeed, many studies have been conducted to elucidate the toxic effects of alternative biocides on aquatic organisms.


Organotin Compound Antifouling Paint Lower Observe Effect Concentration Zinc Pyrithione Aquat Toxicol 
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.


  1. Bushong SJ, Hall Jr. LW, Hall WS et al. (1988) Acute toxicity of tributyltin to selected Chesapeake Bay fish and invertebrates. Water Res 22:1027–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carbery K, Owen R, Frickers T et al. (2006) Contamination of Caribbean coastal waters by the antifouling herebicide Irgarol 1051. Mar Poll Bull 52:635–644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dahl B and Blanck H (1996) Toxic effects of the antifouling agent Irgarol 1051 on periphyton communities in coastal water microcosms. Mar Poll Bull 32:342–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davies PE and White RWG (1985) The toxicology and metabolism of chlorothalonil in fish.I. lethal levels for Salmo gairdneri, Galaxias maculatus, G. truttaceus and G. auratus and the fate of 14C-TCIN in S. gairdneri. Aquat Toxicol 7:93–105Google Scholar
  5. DeLorenzo ME and Serrano L (2006) Mixture toxicity of the antifouling compound Irgarol to the marine phytoplankton species Dunaliella tertiolecta. J Environ Sci Health B 41:1349–1360Google Scholar
  6. Ermolayeva E and Sanders D (1995) Mechanism of pyrithione-induced membrane depolarization in Neurospora crassa. Appl Environ Microbiol 61:3385–3390Google Scholar
  7. Ernst W, Doe K, Jonah P et al. (1991) The toxicity of chlorothalonil to aquatic fauna and the impact of its operational use on a pond ecosystem. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 21:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fai PB, Grant A and Reid B (2007) Chlorophyll a fluorescence as a biomarker for rapid toxicity assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 26:1520–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fent K (1996) Ecotoxicology of organotin compounds. Crit Rev Toxicol 26:1–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gallagher EP, Cattley RC and Di Giulio RT (1992) The acute toxicity and sublethal effects of chlorothalonil in channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus). Aquat Toxicol 23:155–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gatidou G and Thomaidis NS (2007) Evaluation of single and joint toxic effects of two antifoul-ing biocides, their main metabolites and copper using phytoplankton bioassays. Aquat Toxicol 85:184–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Granmo Å, Ekelund R, Sneli J-A et al. (2002) Effects of antifouling paint components (TBTO,copper and triazine) on the early development of embryos in cod (Gadus morhua L.). Mar Poll Bull 44:1142–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hall Jr. LW, Giddings JM, Solomon KR et al. (1999) An ecological risk assessment for the use of Irgarol 1051 as an algaecide for antifoulant paints. Crit Rev Toxicol 29: 367–437Google Scholar
  14. Harino H, Kitano M, Mori Y et al(2005a) Degradation of antifouling booster biocides in water.J Mar Biol Assoc UK 85: 33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harino H, Mori Y, Yamaguchi Y et al. (2005b) Monitoring of antifouling booster biocides in water and sediment from the port of Osaka, Japan. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 48:303–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Harino H, Midorikawa S, Arai T et al. (2006) Concentrations of booster biocides in sediment and clams from Vietnam. J Mar Biol Assoc UK 86:1163–1170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harino H, Yamamoto Y, Eguchi S et al. (2007) Concentrations of antifouling biocides in sedment and mussel samples collected from Otsuchi bay, Japan. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 52:179–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hjorth M, Dahllöf I and Forbes VE (2006) Effects on the function of three trophic levels in marine plankton communities under stress from the antifouling compound zinc pyrithione. Aquat Toxicol 77:105–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kakuno A and Kimura S (1987) Acute toxicity of bis(tributyltin) oxide to girella (Girella punctata)(in Japanese with English abstract). Bull Tokai Reg Fish Res Lab 123:41–44Google Scholar
  20. Karlsson J and Eklund B (2004) New biocide-free anti-fouling paints are toxic. Mar Poll Bull 49:456ȓ464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Konstantinou IK and Albanis TA (2004) Worldwide occurrence and effects of antifouling paint booster biocides in the aquatic environment: a review. Environ Int 30:235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Koutsaftis A and Aoyama I (2006) The interactive effects of binary mixtures of three antifoul-ing biocides and three heavy metals against the marine algae Chaetoceros gracilis. Environ Toxicol 21:432–439CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Koutsaftis A and Aoyama I (2007) Toxicity of four antifouling biocides and their mixtures on the brine shrimp Artemia salina. Sci Total Environ 387:166–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Maguire RJ, Carey JH and Hale EJ (1983) Degradation of the Tri-n-butyltin species in water.J Agric Food Chem 31:1060–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Maraldo K and Dahllöf I (2004) Indirect estimation of degradation time for zinc pyrithione and copper pyrithione in seawater. Mar Poll Bull 48:894–901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mishra VK, Srivastava MK and Raizada RB (1993) Testicular toxicity of thiram in rat: morphological and biochemical evaluations. Ind Health 31:59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mochida K, Ito K, Harino H et al. (2006) Acute toxicity of pyrithione antifouling biocides and joint toxicity with copper to red sea bream (Pagrus major) and toy shrimp (Heptacarpus futilirostris). Environ Toxicol Chem 25:3058–3064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mochida K, Ito K, Harino H et al. (2008) Early life-stage toxicity test for copper pyrithione and induction of skeletal anomaly in a teleost, the mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus). Environ Toxicol Chem 27:367–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nakajima K and Yasuda T (1990) High-performance liquid chromatographic determination of zinc pyrithione in antidandruff preparations based on copper chelate formation. J Chromatogr 502:379–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nishiuchi Y (1977) Toxicity of pesticides to some freshwater fish (in Japanese). Seikatsu to Kankyo 22:28–31Google Scholar
  31. Nishiuchi Y (1979) Toxicity of pesticides to some fresh water organisms (in Japanese).SUISANZOSHOKU 27:36–41Google Scholar
  32. Okamura H and Mieno H (2006) Present status of antifouling systems in Japan: tributyltin substitutes in Japan Antifouling Paint Biocides. In: Konstantinou I (ed) The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry Vol 5 Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg 5:201–212Google Scholar
  33. Okamura H, Aoyama I, Liu D et al. (2000) Fate and ecotoxicity of the new antifouling compound Irgarol 1051 in the aquatic environment. Water Res 34:3523–3530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Okamura H, Watanabe T, Aoyama I et al. (2002) Toxicity evaluation of new antifouling compounds using suspension-cultured fish cells. Chemosphere 46:945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Onduka T, Mochida K, Ito K et al. (2007) Acute toxicity of pyrithione photodegradation products to some marine organisms. International Symposium on Shipbuilding Technology Proceeding 99–106Google Scholar
  36. Sánchez-Bayo F and Goka K (2006) Influence of light in acute toxicity bioassay of imidacloprid and zinc pyrithione to zooplankton crustaceans. Aquat Toxicol 78:262–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shade WD, Hurt SS, Jacobson AH et al. (1993) Ecological risk assessment of a novel marine antifoulant. In: Gorsuch, JW, Dwyer, FJ, Ingersoll, CG, La Point, TW (eds.) Environmental Toxicology and Risk Assessment 2:381–408. American Society for Testing and Materials,PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  38. Sherrard RM, Murray-Gulde CL, Rodgers JHA (2002) Comparative toxicity of chlorothalonil and chlorpyrifos: Ceriodaphnia dubia and Pimephales promelas. Environ Toxicol 17:503–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stoker TE, Jeffay SC, Zucker RM et al. (2003) Abnormal fertilization is responsible for reduced fecundity following thiram-induced ovulatory delay in the rat. Biol Reprod 68:2142–2149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Teraoka H, Urakawa S, Nanba S et al. (2006) Muscular contractions in the zebrafish embryo are necessary to reveal thiuram-induced notochord distortions. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 212:24–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Thomas K V, Blake SJ and Waldock MJ (2000) Antifouling paint booster biocide contamination in UK marine sediments. Mar poll Bull 40:739–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thomas KV, McHugh M and Waldock M (2002) Antifouling paint booster biocides in UK coastal waters: inputs, occurrence and environmental fate. Sci Total Environ 293:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tilton F, La Du JK, Vue M et al. (2006) Dithiocarbamates have a common toxic effect on zebrafish body axis formation. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 216:55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Turley PA, Fenn RJ and Ritter JC (2000) Pyrithiones as antifoulants: environmental chemistry and preliminary risk assessment. Biofouling 15:175–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Turley PA, Fenn RJ, Ritter JC et al. (2005) Pyrithiones as antifoulants: environmental fate and loss of toxicity. Biofouling 21:31–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Van Leeuwen CJ, Maas-Diepeveen JL, Niebeek G et al. (1985a) Aquatic toxicological aspects of dithiocarbamates and related compounds. I. Short-term toxicity tests. Aquat Toxicol 7:145–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Leeuwen CJ, Moberts F and Niebeek G (1985b) Aquatic toxicological aspects of dithiocar-bamates and related compounds. II. Effects on survival, reproduction and growth of Daphnia magna. Aquat Toxicol 7:165–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Van Leeuwen CJ, Espeldoorn A and Mol F (1986a) Aquatic toxicological aspects of dithiocar-bamates and related compounds. III. Embryolarval studies with rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri).Aquat Toxicol 9:129–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Van Leeuwen CJ, Helder T and Seinen W (1986b) Aquatic toxicological aspects of dithiocar-bamates and related compounds. IV. Teratogenicity and histopathology in rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri). Aquat Toxicol 9:147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Voulvoulis N, Scrimshaw MD and Lester JN (2000) Occurrence of four biocides utilized in antifouling paints, as alternatives to organotin compounds, in waters and sediments of a commercial estuary in the UK. Mar Poll Bull 40: 938–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazuhiko Mochida
    • 1
  • Kazunori Fujii
    • 1
  1. 1.Fisheries Research AgencyNational Research Institute of Fisheries and Environment of Inland SeaHatsukaichiJapan

Personalised recommendations