The Effect of Microbial Biofilms on Organotin Release by an Antifouling Paint

Mihm, James W.; Leob, George I

doi:10.1007/978-94-009-1363-9_41

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That would explain why ''tougher'' cleaning methods led to 10-to 30-fold increases in the release rate compared to the much more subtle changes observed when using a milder cleaning method (Valkirs et al 2003). Also, the effect of removing the biofilm on the release rate of TBTCl is clearly seen in the study of Mihm and Loeb (1988), where the release rates were approximately doubled compared to the fouling-free case as a result of the cleaning process ( Figure 5; see next section). TBT þ release rate studies.…”

Section: Potential Sources Of Interference Biofilm-af Paint Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 85%

“…copper and TBT-based compounds) is rapidly covered by a microbial biofilm (Saroyan, 1969;Bishop et al 1974;Loeb, 1980;Dempsey, 1981a;1981b;Jackson & Jones, 1988;Blair et al 1988;Mihm & Loeb, 1988;Heath et al 1993;Schatzberg, 1996;White et al 34 D. M. Yebra et al 1996;1999;Tang & Cooney, 1998;Woods et al 1988;Cooney & Tang, 1999;Valkirs et al 2003). Some examples of fouling sequences on AF paints are given by Jackson and Jones (1988).…”

Section: Biofilms On Af Paintsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Additionally, different studies have also shown that this new biofilm layer modifies the release and transport rates of the species involved in the activity of AF paints (WHOI, 1952; Gorbenko & Smirnova, 1987;Mihm & Loeb, 1988;Valkirs et al 2003).…”

Section: Consequences Of Biofilm Formation On Af Paintsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition, the breakdown of key paint ingredients by biofilms, as a way of modifying the concentration gradients along the diffusion layer of the paint, should also be considered. TBT-groups were reportedly biodegraded to a small extent by biofilms (Mihm & Loeb, 1988;Dubey & Roy, 2003), and so did rosin derivatives (WHOI, 1952;Saroyan, 1969). Most modern tin-free biocides are biodegradable (Yebra et al 2004), so they will probably undergo chemical transformations within the slimes.…”

Section: Potential Sources Of Interference Biofilm-af Paint Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The average thickness after 6 months' immersion was approximately 11 mm. Biofilms 22 -38 mm thick (measured by light microscopy) were formed onto TBT-SPC coated panels by ASTM class 2 sea water for 38 d (Mihm & Loeb, 1988). Thicknesses ranging from 2 -30 mm (SEM measurements) are reported by Bishop et al (1974).…”

Section: Biofilm Thickness and Morphologymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Presence and effects of marine microbial biofilms on biocide-based antifouling paints

Yebra¹,

Kiil²,

Weinell³

et al. 2006

Biofouling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine microorganisms are capable of successfully colonizing toxic surfaces through the formation of biofilm structures. In this article, most of the literature reporting the presence of marine biofilms on chemically-active antifouling paints is briefly reviewed. Of special concern is the influence of the dense extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) matrix on the release rate of the compounds involved in antifouling paint performance (i.e. active compounds and controlled-release binder molecules). A deeper understanding of these phenomena is of interest for both environmental legislators and paint formulators.

show abstract

Section: Potential Sources Of Interference Biofilm-af Paint Mechanismsmentioning

confidence: 85%