As shown in Table 4, in addition to the above methods, the most common methods for controlling L. fortunei are manual and mechanical cleaning, filtration, and manipulations of water flow (Nagaya et al. 2001). Among them, manual and mechanical cleaning is one of the most direct and effective methods in a short time. Although both larvae and adults can be temporarily removed by these physical methods, some methods are not particularly time-sensitive and some can damage facility surfaces. Appropriate and effective measures should be taken based on the actual situation.

Table 4

Summary of methods available for controlling Limnoperna fortunei

TypeMethodAdvantageDisadvantageReferenceMain findings
Physical method 
  • Antifouling materials and coatings

  • Manual/mechanical cleaning

  • Filtration

  • Oxygen deprivation

  • Thermal treatment

  • Desiccation

  • Ultraviolet treatment

  • Ultrasound

  • Low water temperature

  • Manipulations of water flow

 
  • Quick and effective in a short time

  • No chemical pollution

 
  • Timeliness is short

  • It needs to be repeated

  • The economic effect is poor

  • Increase the roughness of the materials

 
Matsui et al. (2002); Montalto & Ezcurra de Drago (2003); Ohkawa & Nomura (2015); Perepelizin & Boltovskoy (2011, 2015); Zhao et al. (2019); Zhou et al. (2021)  Ultrasound could effectively reduce the early stages of Limnoperna fortunei.
Sodium hypochlorite can dissolve byssus at even low concentrations.
Preventing them from entering the tunnels is the most efficient method to avoid biofouling by Limnoperna fortunei
Chemical method 
  • Chlorine

  • Chlorine dioxide

  • Chloramine

  • Ozone

  • Hydrogen peroxide

  • Sodium dichloroisocyanurate

  • Potassium permanganate

  • Ferrate

  • pH adjustment

  • Copper sulphate

  • Salinity

  • MXD-100

  • Ammonia

  • Ammonium chloride

  • Nanoparticles

  • TiO2

 
  • Simple and efficient

  • Dissolving byssus

  • Long-term inhibition of its growth

 
  • The dosage is not easy to control

  • Waste of resources

  • Cause secondary risk

 
Claudi & de Oliveira (2015); Girardello et al. (2021); Li et al. (2019); Li et al. (2021); Montresor et al. (2013); Nunes et al. (2020) 
Biological method 
  • Ecological pool

  • Fish

 
Environmental-friendly Low efficiency Godoy et al. (2018); Xu et al. (2015a) 
Combined control 
  • Combination of multiple strategies

 
High efficiency High costs Darrigran & Damborenea (2015); Liu et al. (2020) 
TypeMethodAdvantageDisadvantageReferenceMain findings
Physical method 
  • Antifouling materials and coatings

  • Manual/mechanical cleaning

  • Filtration

  • Oxygen deprivation

  • Thermal treatment

  • Desiccation

  • Ultraviolet treatment

  • Ultrasound

  • Low water temperature

  • Manipulations of water flow

 
  • Quick and effective in a short time

  • No chemical pollution

 
  • Timeliness is short

  • It needs to be repeated

  • The economic effect is poor

  • Increase the roughness of the materials

 
Matsui et al. (2002); Montalto & Ezcurra de Drago (2003); Ohkawa & Nomura (2015); Perepelizin & Boltovskoy (2011, 2015); Zhao et al. (2019); Zhou et al. (2021)  Ultrasound could effectively reduce the early stages of Limnoperna fortunei.
Sodium hypochlorite can dissolve byssus at even low concentrations.
Preventing them from entering the tunnels is the most efficient method to avoid biofouling by Limnoperna fortunei
Chemical method 
  • Chlorine

  • Chlorine dioxide

  • Chloramine

  • Ozone

  • Hydrogen peroxide

  • Sodium dichloroisocyanurate

  • Potassium permanganate

  • Ferrate

  • pH adjustment

  • Copper sulphate

  • Salinity

  • MXD-100

  • Ammonia

  • Ammonium chloride

  • Nanoparticles

  • TiO2

 
  • Simple and efficient

  • Dissolving byssus

  • Long-term inhibition of its growth

 
  • The dosage is not easy to control

  • Waste of resources

  • Cause secondary risk

 
Claudi & de Oliveira (2015); Girardello et al. (2021); Li et al. (2019); Li et al. (2021); Montresor et al. (2013); Nunes et al. (2020) 
Biological method 
  • Ecological pool

  • Fish

 
Environmental-friendly Low efficiency Godoy et al. (2018); Xu et al. (2015a) 
Combined control 
  • Combination of multiple strategies

 
High efficiency High costs Darrigran & Damborenea (2015); Liu et al. (2020) 

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal