Next Article in Journal
Unlocking the Potential of Red Seaweeds: A Special Focus on Grateloupia turuturu Yamada and Porphyra umbilicalis Kütz
Previous Article in Journal
Structural and Immunological Insights into the Lipooligosaccharide of the Marine Bacterium Kangiella japonica KMM 3897
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Marine Drugs
Volume 23
Issue 9
10.3390/md23090346
marinedrugs-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Harnessing Marine Algae for Sustainable Agriculture: Natural Bioactive Compounds as Eco-Friendly Pesticidal Agents

by
Georgi Beev
1,*,
Diyana Dermendzhieva
2,
Zvezdelina Yaneva
3,
Georgi Kalaydzhiev
4,
Nikolina Naydenova
4,
Daniela Stoeva
1,
Denitsa Georgieva
3,
Silviya Hristova
3,
Zornitsa Beeva
1 and
Nikolay Petrov
1
1
Department of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Trakia University, Students Campus, 6000 Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
2
Department of Applied Ecology and Animal Hygiene, Faculty of Agriculture, Trakia University, 6000 Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
3
Department of Pharmacology, Animal Physiology, Biochemistry and Chemistry, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Trakia University, Students Campus, 6000 Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
4
Department of Livestock-Ruminants and Technologies of Animal Products, Faculty of Agriculture, Trakia University, Students Campus, 6000 Stara Zagora, Bulgaria
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mar. Drugs 2025, 23(9), 346; https://doi.org/10.3390/md23090346
Submission received: 10 August 2025 / Revised: 26 August 2025 / Accepted: 28 August 2025 / Published: 28 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Marine Pharmacology)
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

Currently, marine algae are capturing the attention of both farmers and researchers eager to integrate sustainable methods to safeguard their crops. Instead of relying exclusively on synthetic pesticides, which often have negative environmental effects, some growers are now exploring algae-based products in hopes of reducing pest pressures. Various natural compounds sourced from algae—such as specific fatty acids and complex sugars—are believed to inhibit pest development, although their precise mechanisms are yet to be fully understood. Furthermore, there is some evidence suggesting that these compounds may bolster the plant’s own immune responses, thus enhancing crop resilience. Despite certain limitations on field applications, various techniques, including spraying, amending soil, or pre-treating seeds, are currently being evaluated. The results from the laboratory present a positive outlook, but implementing these discoveries to ensure consistent efficacy in practical settings is a major challenge. Variables such as climatic fluctuations, product durability, and formulation standards all elevate this complexity. In every instance, the approach of incorporating algae to lessen chemical dependence while securing uniform yields persists in being of interest, particularly in the area of organic or low-input farming.

1. Introduction

Marine algae, comprising various important seaweeds and smaller organisms, are receiving growing academic interest for their possible function in eco-conscious pest management solutions [1,2,3]. Numerous chemical components are generated by these biological systems, which include phenolics, terpenoids, sulfated polysaccharides, fatty acids, and alkaloids based on nitrogen [4,5,6]. These specific metabolites assist algae in adjusting to life in marine settings, while increasing evidence shows they could also potentially affect agricultural pests that harm crop success. Many natural substances closely resemble the activity of conventional chemical agents such as antibiotics and insecticides, and they can effectively suppress microbial growth and deter pests [2,7]. With their natural origin, algal biopesticides offer a more sustainable and safer alternative to synthetic pesticides, whose residues often persist and rank among the most significant environmental pollutants, posing long-term risks to both the nature and human health [8,9]. Conversely, organic substances from marine algae usually degrade quickly and are less harmful to non-target species [3,5]. Laboratory studies show that these compounds may suppress pest growth and reproduction, offering protection for beneficial species like pollinators [10,11]. Not only limited to pest control, certain algae extracts appear to spark the defensive responses in plants, thereby increasing the crops’ resistance to diseases and supporting their overall development and robustness [12,13,14]. Employing marine algae in compost or as soil supplements yields substantial agricultural benefits by nurturing microbial diversity and renewing essential nutrients found in the ground [15]. However, ongoing examinations are vital to fully realize the lasting environmental consequences associated with these biopesticides. Uncertainties persist regarding the potential impacts of repeated applications on aquatic systems or the possible unintended alterations in ecological equilibrium [16,17].
This review explores the role of marine algae in sustainable agriculture by examining their pesticidal properties, explaining how these compounds work and are applied, and highlighting the ecological and practical advantages they offer over chemical pesticides.

2. Pesticidal Properties of Marine Algae

2.1. Insecticidal Activity

Chemical resistance is a major issue, and more people are looking to nature for safer options. Marine algae have proven effective in controlling various agricultural pests, including insects and mites, by targeting biochemical pathways, including enzymatic activity, physiological stability and development, positioning them as strong candidates for safer, greener pest control methods [18,19]. Researchers have discovered that algae extracts can interrupt the insect life cycle by stopping eggs from hatching, killing larvae, or slowing their development as they grow. What is exciting is that these effects are not limited to a single pest—they have been observed in both mosquitoes and crop-damaging insects [20,21,22,23]. One advantage is that these natural products break down fast and do not stick around to harm helpful animals like bees or earthworms [3,24]. One clear example is Sargassum latifolium, a brown algae species whose compounds block the chitin production, a key material in an insect’s outer shell. Without enough chitin, insects cannot develop properly—or survive at all [25]. The species Padina pavonica (Phaeophyceae) also shows good insecticidal activity. Its benzene extract was tested on a cotton bug (Dysdercus cingulatus), and the results were strong: fewer eggs hatched, more young insects died, and internal damage was clear from protein and DNA loss [26]. Other brown algae, like Sargassum wightii and Turbinaria ornata, produce tannins that interfere with enzymes insects need—such as amylase and protease—to properly digest their food. For instance, Petchidurai et al. [11] reported that the cotton leafhopper (Amrasca devastans) could not digest food properly, which led to increased mortality. A separate study found that methanolic extracts of S. wightii killed over 83% of diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) larvae at a 3% dose [27]. Detailed profiling of S. wightii revealed the presence of ethyl salicylate, methyl salicylate, ethyl palmitate, palmitic acid, oleic acid, phytolin, and diethyl phthalate, which are responsible for its larvicidal efficacy against mosquitoes and moth larvae [28]. Green algae demonstrated their insecticidal potential too. Extracts from Ulva lactuca and Caulerpa scalpelliformis (Chlorophyta) proved toxic to Spodoptera litura larvae, with higher doses leading to higher death rates [29]. In particular, Chaetomorpha antennina (Chlorophyta) produces fatty acids such as hexadecanoic, octadecanoic, and linoleic acids, which trigger systemic defense responses in tomato plants against S. litura [6].
Marine algae and their metabolites are not only effective during crop growth but also show considerable promise for controlling pests in stored commodities. For example, volatile oils extracted from Actinotrichia fragilis, Liagora ceranoides (Rhodophyta), and Colpomenia sinuosa (Phaeophyceae) caused between 55 and 90% mortality of Oryzaephilus mercator and 60–80% mortality of Tribolium castaneum when applied at 12 μL/L air for 48 h. In particular, the oil from A. fragilis, which contains 39.6% 1-dodecanol, produced 80–90% mortality in both pest species [30]. In a similar vein, n-hexane extracts from the S. latifolium were highly effective against multiple stored-product pests, including T. castaneum. These extracts not only damaged the insect exoskeleton but also likely acted as chitin synthase inhibitors, as suggested by molecular docking studies [25]. Together, these results indicate that marine algal bioactive compounds could serve as eco-friendly alternatives for post-harvest pest management, complementing their established role during crop growth.
As detailed in Table 1, a variety of marine algae exhibit potent insecticidal properties, with effects ranging from enzyme inhibition to structural damage in target pests.
Even with these successes, we are still figuring out a lot. Most research uses crude extracts without isolating the specific compounds that actually work. Moreover, most tests happen in labs, not real farms. That is a problem, since the chemical makeup of algae can change with the season or where they are collected [17,41]. Different lab methods and target pests also make it tough to compare findings [18,42]. We still do not have firm guidelines or long-term safety studies, and that slows down product development [14,24]. To move this research ahead, we need to identify the most effective compounds, test them in actual farming conditions, and make sure the products work reliably, no matter how the environment changes. Marine algae might not be a perfect solution yet, but they hold real promise as safer, natural tools for modern insect control [6,39,43].

2.2. Fungicidal Activity

Marine algae offer promising natural alternatives for managing fungal diseases in agriculture. Researchers have studied many species across green, brown, and red algal groups which can release compounds that either suppress fungal growth or help plants strengthen their own defenses [44,45,46,47].
Ulva lactuca (formerly Ulva fasciata) and Ulva flexuosa (formerly Enteromorpha flexuosa), two green algae, reduced the growth of soil fungi like Fusarium solani and Macrophomina phaseolina in cucumber. Chloroform extracts of U. lactuca (formerly U. fasciata) cut fungal proliferation by nearly 69% [48]. The red seaweed Solieria robusta, when applied to soil, lowered root rot levels in soybean caused by Fusarium solani and also suppressed nematodes [49]. Extracts from Laurencia johnstonii (Rhodophyta) and Dictyota dichotoma (Phaeophyceae), representing red and brown algae, inhibited growth of Fusarium oxysporum and other pathogens [44,50]. Other brown species like Cystoseira humilis var. myriophylloides (formerly Cystoseira myriophylloides) and Laminaria digitata (Phaeophyceae) limited the spread of Verticillium dahliae and Botrytis cinerea [51]. In addition to direct antifungal action, certain algae activate plant immune systems. Foliar treatments using Padina pavonica, Acanthophora spicifera, and Ulva lactuca reduced the severity of rice blast caused by Pyricularia oryzae. Treated plants produced more peroxidase and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase, enzymes linked to disease resistance [45,52]. Beyond crude extracts, isolated compounds such as norcycloartane-type triterpenes from Tydemania expeditionis have shown strong inhibition against Fusarium oxysporum and Colletotrichum lagenarium, respectively [53]. Similarly, formulations derived from Ascophyllum nodosum (Phaeophyceae) enhanced chitinase and β-1,3-glucanase in cucumber, leading to reduced damage from Fusarium oxysporum and Alternaria cucumerinum [12]. Polyphenolic compounds also contribute: phlorotannins from brown algae exert broad antifungal effects [54], while rosmarinic acid and quercetin from Gracilariopsis persica inhibited Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum [55]. In addition, the brown alga Turbinaria conoides produces a range of compounds, including sterols, fucoidans, and esters such as dibutyl phthalate, demonstrating suppressive potential on Fusarium oxysporum [56]. These findings highlight the value of identifying and characterizing individual metabolites to complement studies relying only on crude extract evaluations.
Green algae like Caulerpa racemosa and Cladophora glomerata generate bioactive compounds that suppress the proliferation of various phytopathogenic fungi (with documented effects against Botrytis and Curvularia spp.) [50]. Meanwhile, Auxenochlorella protothecoides (formerly Chlorella protothecoides), a well-known freshwater microalga (some strains can tolerate brackish conditions), suppressed the growth of postharvest fungi, including Aspergillus niger and Penicillium expansum, which are also major contributors to fruit and vegetable spoilage [57].
Additionally, polysaccharides—such as laminarin and carrageenan (except of their insecticidal property) act by enhancing the plant’s defense systems rather than attacking the fungi themselves [58]. This multi-target action also helps prevent resistance buildup in pathogens [47]. Table 2 summarizes the diverse antifungal effects observed across green, brown, and red algal species, highlighting both direct pathogen suppression and induced plant immunity.
Still, several obstacles remain. Algal chemistry can shift with the season, location, or harvesting method, which affects consistency [17,64]. Many studies use crude extracts without identifying which substances do the work [42]. Most experiments stay in the lab or greenhouse, so we still lack large-scale field data [18]. Some extracts degrade too fast unless stabilized [24]. In many regions, product approval is delayed by unclear regulatory systems [14].

2.3. Nematicidal Activity

Root-knot nematodes are a major threat in agriculture. By damaging roots and causing galls, they weaken the plant and often lead to major losses in crop yield. Scientists have started exploring marine algae as a safer, natural way to fight these pests thanks to the bioactive compounds they produce [41,65,66]. From powders to extracts, algae-based treatments have proven effective at managing nematodes. While most studies employ crude extracts, specific compounds have been identified. GC–MS analysis of the most effective fraction of Colpomenia sinuosa (Phaeophyceae) methylene chloride eluent revealed five major bioactive constituents: dibutyl phthalate, methyl methyltetradecanoate, palmitic acid, 1-propene-1,2,3-tricarboxylic acid and tributyl ester [67]. Using the same assay, silver nanoparticles synthesized from C. sinuosa and Corallina mediterranea (Rhodophyta, Corallinaceae) demonstrated potent nematicidal activity against Meloidogyne incognita in tomato plants [67], highlighting the potential of both isolated compounds and nanoparticle formulations for nematode management.
Green algae Ulva lactuca lowered gall formation and nematode counts in banana crops—likely thanks to its high phenolic content [68]. Published data from 2009 and 2011 reported that applying dry powdered seaweeds to nematode-infested soils or tomato plant roots led to significant reductions in nematode populations and enhanced plant biomass. The seaweeds included green (Halimeda tuna) (Chlorophyta), brown (Spatoglossum asperum, Sargassum swartzii, Spatoglossum variabile) (Phaeophyceae), and red (Melanothamnus afaqhusainii) (Rhodophyta) species, indicating both protective and growth-promoting effects. However, maximum nematicidal effect was observed when seaweed applications were combined with the synthetic nematicide carbofuran [49,69]. This outcome suggests that while seaweeds offer notable nematicidal potential, their effectiveness may be limited on their own, and successful nematode management still requires support from chemical agents.
Likewise, methanolic extracts and commercially available seaweed products from brown algae species Phacelocarpus tristichus, Turbinaria ornata, Ascophyllum nodosum and Ecklonia maxima lowered the number of Meloidogyne incognita, Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Meloidogyne hapla in tomato roots, while also helping the plants grow better [4,70]. Ethanolic extracts of Padina concrescens (Phaeophyceae) and Laurencia johnstonii also stopped a large portion of nematode eggs from hatching and reduced the survival of juveniles. Meanwhile, soil treatments using Spatoglossum schroederi (Phaeophyceae) cut down root galling and improved the root health of infected tomatoes [41]. An overview of nematicidal outcomes, presented in Table 3, illustrates the capacity of algal extracts to reduce root-knot nematode lations while supporting plant vigor.
The interesting part is that algae do not just go after the nematodes—they also make the plants better at protecting themselves. In particular, foliar sprays made from marine algae increased enzyme activity linked to plant resistance—such as polyphenol oxidase and peroxidase—which likely makes the plants tougher against nematode attacks [47].
Using algae and Cyanobacteria to manage nematodes comes with similar limitations as other algae-based pest controls, including differences in effectiveness depending on the environment and how the products are prepared.

2.4. Herbicidal Activity

Studies on the possible use of seaweed extracts as novel bioherbicide sources is a relatively new area with very limited data in this space (Table 4). Researchers have started paying closer attention to marine algae as a potential source of natural herbicides, thanks to the wide variety of biologically active compounds they produce [73]. Phenolic compounds, which are usually associated with antioxidant activity [74], have also been linked to plant growth suppression in recent studies [5,65,75,76]. That said, their role in herbicidal activity is not completely clear. For instance, Chukwuma et al. [77] tested red seaweed (Mastocarpus stellatus and Porphyra dioica) (Rhodophyta) extracts and noted that while methanol and petroleum ether extracts—rich in phenolics—were inhibitory, similar extracts made using n-hexane were not, even though they also contained phenolic compounds. This suggests that other chemicals, or combinations of several, might be doing the heavy lifting.
Another study by Haniffa et al. [78] tested how 16 different seaweed extracts affected lettuce seed growth. Seven of them had a noticeable impact at 1000 ppm. Notably, Laurencia heteroclada (Rhodophyta), Caulerpa racemosa, and Caulerpa sertularioides (Chlorophyta) were the most effective in suppressing seed germination and root development. Lettuce seeds treated with C. racemosa developed roots less than a centimeter long, while untreated seeds grew roots over three times that length. Although chemical analysis of the L. heteroclada extract revealed several noteworthy compounds, including algoane and caulerpin, algoane alone did not replicate the extract’s full inhibitory effect.
This finding suggests that no single compound is solely responsible for the phytotoxic activity. Instead, it points to a likely synergistic interaction among multiple components within the extract [78,79]. As shown in Table 4, several marine algae demonstrate phytotoxic effects on weed species, indicating their promise as environmentally friendly bioherbicides.
Table 4. Herbicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Table 4. Herbicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Algal SpeciesTarget PestProduct/EffectsReference
Chlorophyta (green microalgae)Model organismsFatty acids, aldehydes exert herbicidal effects[5]
Microalgae allelochemicalsWeedsAllelochemical biocontrol[65]
Microalgae speciesWeedsStructural diversity of allelochemicals[75]
Ulva intestinalis (formerly Enteromorpha intestinalis) (Chlorophyta)WeedsPhytotoxic effects[76]
Mastocarpus stellatus and Porphyra dioicawhite clover (Trifolium repens L.) and Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum)Pre- and post-emergence herbicidal effects[77]
Plocamium brasiliense (Rhodophyta)Mimosa pudica and Senna obtusifoliaAllelopathic effects halogenated monoterpenes[79]
Taken together, these results show that seaweeds may have real potential as herbicidal agents. Thanks to the complex chemistry found in these marine plants, especially the way different compounds might interact, they offer a promising and more environmental-friendly alternative to traditional weed killers [73].

3. Mechanisms of Action of Algal-Derived Pesticides

Bioactive molecules from marine algae influence a range of biological systems in both pests and pathogens. A notable example is enzyme inhibition. Some species of red algae, for instance Laurencia obtusa, L. nidifica, L. johnstonii, Palisada perforata (formerly L. papillosa) and Plocamium cartilagineum generate halogenated sesquiterpenes and brominated elements that boost reactive oxygen species (ROS) in pest cells [8,23,36,40,44,80,81]. These compounds compete for binding with LuxR-type proteins, ultimately silencing genes involved in virulence and breaking down bacterial coordination [44,82]. This type inhibition of signaling pathways represents a subtle but effective mode of biological control, especially in microorganisms prone to resistance from conventional bactericides. Still, it is hard to achieve consistent results outside the lab since the compounds can break down easily or are not always absorbed well by plants or pests.
Enzyme-targeting compounds are not limited to bacterial systems. Tannins obtained from species of brown algae, including Sargassum spp. exhibit strong metal-chelating and protein-binding properties, which inactivate key metalloenzymes involved in respiration and DNA synthesis, thereby disrupting vital processes in more complex eukaryotic pests as well [11,17]. Yet, the effectiveness of these metabolites can fluctuate significantly with changes in harvest timing, algal maturity, and extraction techniques, posing a challenge for standardization in product development [1]. Algae, particularly the green and brown types, are noted for their abundance of fatty acids such as palmitic, oleic, and linoleic [60]. These molecules integrate into pest cell membranes, disturbing their structure. As a result, the membranes become more permeable, leading to fluid imbalance and, in many cases, cell rupture [4,5]. Another important mechanism involves the inhibition of neural enzymes. Phlorotannins isolated from the brown alga Ecklonia maxima exhibited significant acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitory activity, providing direct evidence for a neurotoxic mode of action in pest control [83]. Similarly, metabolites from the red alga Laurencia snackeyi displayed strong in vitro and in silico cholinesterase inhibition, attributed to halogenated sesquiterpenes [84]. In addition, the cyanobacterial metabolite anatoxin-a(S), produced by Anabaena flos-aquae, irreversibly inhibits AChE, leading to overstimulation of synapses and paralysis [85]. Extracts from Spirulina sp. and Nostoc muscorum reduced the activities of glutathione S-transferase (GST), cytochrome P450, and carboxylesterases in Spodoptera frugiperda, thereby impairing the insect’s ability to metabolize and detoxify xenobiotics [86]. Although these agents act swiftly and target a wide range of pests, their persistence in field conditions is limited. Environmental factors—mainly sunlight, temperature, pH, and microbial activity—can accelerate their degradation, shortening their protective effect and making field performance less predictable [24].
Apart from direct toxicity, some marine algal metabolites strengthen plant immunity. Sulfated polysaccharides such as carrageenans [63] and ulvans mimic microbial-associated molecular patterns and stimulate systemic plant defense pathways governed by salicylic acid, jasmonic acid, and ethylene. These processes boost the activity of protective enzymes like chitinase, β-1,3-glucanase, peroxidase, and phenylalanine ammonia-lyase [12,87]. Such treatments offer a useful approach, but their effectiveness often fluctuates as polysaccharide composition changes between algal types and across seasons [42]. Laminarin, extracted from brown algae Laminaria digitata, has gained wide recognition in this group for its strong and consistent elicitor effects. It sets off mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascades, strengthens ROS signaling, and encourages the production of antimicrobial compounds in plants [47,88].
Nonetheless, the production of highly purified laminarin suitable for agricultural formulations remains both technically complex and cost-intensive. Certain algal metabolites also influence ion transport processes in plant tissues. For instance, some brown algae modulate the activity of H+-ATPase pumps in roots and leaves, thereby enhancing nutrient absorption and potentially modifying rhizosphere interactions [65,89]. A review on seaweed fertilizers describes how extracts from brown algae (e.g., Ascophyllum nodosum, Durvillaea antarctica) and Kappaphycus alvarezii (Rhodophyta) improve nutrient uptake (N, P, K, S) in soybean and tomato, enhance plant stress tolerance, and reduce electrolyte leakage—effects often associated with improved ion transport homeostasis [90]. While these adjustments in plant physiology are encouraging for enhancing crop strength and defense, their reliability in the external environment (in actual field settings) still needs to be thoroughly tested [91].
Marine algae’s capability to create hormonal analogs is significant for overseeing plant growth and development. Some of these compounds mimic plant hormones like auxins and cytokinins, influencing root growth, leaf shape, and even the release of volatile organic compounds that can attract helpful insects or ward off pests [43,92,93]. Despite their potential, the intricate interactions and environmental variability keep posing hurdles for dependable application [6]. Algal-origin pesticides stand out because of their remarkable skill in targeting numerous biological mechanisms all at once. They affect different biological pathways—enzyme activity, membrane integrity, and immune responses—making it harder for pests to develop resistance compared to synthetic pesticides that usually target only one site [3,94]. There have been promising outcomes, but regulatory approval is still difficult to obtain. Authorities usually require a well-defined active agent and a clear mode of action, which are hard to determine in naturally diverse algal extracts [14]. Without scalable extraction methods and formulation stabilization, translating this potential into commercially viable products remains a considerable challenge [17,18].

4. Methods of Application for Crop Protection

Marine algae can be introduced into agricultural systems through several practical methods, each offering specific advantages for crop protection and productivity. Foliar spraying, in particular, stands out for its efficiency. Applying algae extracts to leaves allows plants to absorb compounds that initiate their own protective responses by activating important signaling pathways [62,95]. After the signals are set off, the plant activates the production of enzymes (polyphenol oxidase and peroxidase) to boost its natural defenses [96].
Empirical evidence suggests that the application of diluted foliar treatments may lower the need for synthetic chemical inputs and improve plant tolerance to stress conditions [51,90]. Recent articles indicated that the foliar application of seaweed formulations significantly aided in the management of early blight in Solanum lycopersicum and mitigated the prevalence of peach leaf curl, concurrently contributing to enhanced yield outcomes [97]. The results of these treatments are closely aligned with the extraction method utilized, since methanol or ethanol-based formulations increase the concentration of active phenolics and fatty acids [59,64].
Beyond foliar sprays, soil application of marine algae, whether in composted, powdered, or liquid forms is widely practiced [98]. These applications not only support root system growth and encourage microbial balance but also reduce the occurrence of soil-borne pathogens, including root-knot nematodes and Fusarium wilt [48,99]. Red and brown algae, when integrated into soil, allow for slow nutrient release while maintaining pathogen suppression, especially valuable in organic farming systems.
A further successful method is the treatment of seeds, which comprises soaking seeds in diluted algal extracts before planting. This technique is correlated with increased germination rates and seedling vigor, leading to improved resistance to early-stage pathogenic infections [51]. Such seed-focused application prime the seeds by initiating defense-related gene expression and improving internal biochemistry, helping young plants better handle biotic and abiotic challenges. In this regard, the algal species Kappaphycus alvarezii (Rhodophyta), Sargassum polycystum (formerly Sargassum myriocystum) (Phaeophyceae), and Ulva lactuca, are particularly effective in supporting early root architecture and vigor [88,100].
Increasingly, marine algal bioproducts are being delivered through integrated methods, including fertigation and root dipping. Multiple delivery methods used in tandem have shown enhanced effectiveness in difficult cultivation conditions. For example, Sahana et al. [101] observed that applying both foliar and soil treatments significantly lowered rice blast severity and increased plant biomass.
Altogether, the flexibility of marine algae in seed priming, foliar spraying, soil conditioning, and integrated treatments positions them as one of the main component of sustainable crop protection strategies. Their compatibility with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) frameworks offers an environmentally sound alternative to synthetic pesticides [90,102]. Future advancements in this domain will rely on refining formulations, establishing consistent dosages, and verifying results under field conditions.

5. Advantages of Marine Algae-Based Biopesticides

The basic benefits of marine algae-based biopesticides, such as their safety and pest-selective action, have been covered earlier, so the following section highlights further advantages related to their use and practical challenges that may arise.
From an environmental perspective, marine algae are highly sustainable. They grow quickly, do not need freshwater or farmland, and can be raised in the ocean without causing much harm to the environment. Species from genus Ulva (Chlorophyta), Sargassum (Phaeophyceae), and Gracilaria (Rhodophyta) grow easily in different coastal areas, making them a practical and land-efficient source of biomass [3,103]. Unlike synthetic pesticides, growing algae uses much less energy, produces fewer greenhouse gases, and creates byproducts that support the goals of sustainable and low-carbon agriculture [104,105,106].
Economically, algae-based biopesticides offer advantages that are especially relevant for resource-limited settings. Algal biomass can be locally sourced or cultivated with minimal infrastructure, making it an affordable option for smallholder farmers [107,108]. In many coastal areas, seaweeds commonly collected for food, cosmetics, or fertilizers can also finding new use as raw materials for crop protection products. This not only helps reduce waste but also supports circular economy practices [109]. Their multifunctionality—as pest deterrents, plant growth promoters, and soil conditioners—reduces the need for multiple agricultural inputs, lowering overall production costs [11,110]. Additionally, studies have reported increased yield and quality in treated crops such as tomato, rice, and cucumber, suggesting a strong economic return [48,95]. Algal biopesticides fit naturally into IPM systems and offer a practical solution for sustainable agriculture. Their compatibility with microbial biocontrol agents and minimal impact on non-target organisms further enhances their value in environmentally responsible crop protection [111,112]. Because repeated application of algae-based biopesticides does not promote resistance in pests, they offer a reliable long-term solution that helps to decrease chemical use [113]. Since they are approved for use in organic systems, these products help producers access certified markets and tap into higher-value opportunities [92,102]. Improvement of soil quality is another significant benefit. Applied as compost or soil additives, marine algae supply key nutrients and organic matter that help enhancing soil fertility and structure [114,115]. This creates the right conditions for proliferation of beneficial soil microflora, leading to improved nutrient cycling, stimulate root development, and strengthen plant resilience against abiotic stresses like drought and salinity [99,116]. Such long-term agronomic advantages are generally absent in conventional pest control products, which may instead disrupt microbial balances or degrade soil over time.
Most of the limitations of algae-based biopesticides have already been addressed, including variability in efficacy, challenges with standardization, formulation stability, and supply constraints. Continued research and field testing remain important to overcome these issues.

6. Conclusions

The metabolites derived from marine algae are invaluable, possessing various pesticidal capabilities and showcasing a sustainable option relative to traditional agricultural chemicals. The way they merge pest management with encouraging plant growth and supporting soil vitality positions them as essential parts of integrated pest control strategies. Taking lab accomplishments and translating them into credible results on the ground requires refining the stability of formulations, unifying active elements, and crafting tailored application approaches. Collaborative interdisciplinary research and validation in the field will be crucial to fulfilling their potential in robust, low-input agricultural practices.

7. Future Directions

Although the study of marine algae has made significant progress, numerous unresolved issues remain. To begin with, cultivating algae specifically for agricultural purposes may appear promising in theory, but it is still uncertain which strains are truly viable for large-scale cultivation. Additional research is necessary to identify the most advantageous species—not only in laboratory settings but also regarding availability and usability for farmers in real-world scenarios.
Furthermore, there is a need to delve deeper into the chemistry of these algal compounds. Some extracts yield positive results, while others do not perform as expected, and the reasons for these discrepancies are not always clear. Investing in advanced tools or interdisciplinary methods that extend beyond conventional testing may be warranted. It is possible that we have been neglecting lesser-known compounds that could play a significant role in efficacy.
Moreover, a broader consideration of integration is essential. Even if marine algae demonstrate effectiveness, how do they integrate with existing agricultural systems? Are they compatible with precision farming technologies, or do they align better with traditional practices? Additionally, how will small-scale farmers react to them in contrast to large-scale producers? These inquiries cannot be resolved in laboratory conditions—they necessitate practical trials and genuine discussions with those involved in food production.
In addition, the impact of climate change introduces an extra layer of urgency. As climatic conditions become more erratic and new pests emerge, algae-based products could offer benefits beyond mere pest management. They may enhance plant resilience to stress or contribute to soil health restoration. We will not uncover these potentials unless we actively investigate them.
All of this underscores one crucial point: future research should not merely reinforce existing knowledge. It must take a step back to pose broader questions—concerning practicality, accessibility, resilience, and the ultimate goals of modern agriculture.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.B. and D.D.; methodology, G.B.; validation, Z.Y., G.K. and N.N.; formal analysis, D.S.; investigation, D.G., S.H. and Z.B.; resources, G.B.; data curation, N.N.; writing—original draft preparation, G.B. and D.D.; writing—review and editing, Z.Y., D.S. and N.P.; visualization, D.G.; supervision, G.B.; project administration, G.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was financially supported by the EU and the Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Culture through project BG-RRP-2.004-0006-C02 “Development of scientific research and innovation at Trakia University in the service of health and sustainable well-being”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Scientific Project H001-2023.53/23.01.2024 “Single Cell Protein (SCP) for Smart Agriculture and Functional Food Enrichment”.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
IPMintegrated pest management
MAPKmitogen-activated protein kinase
ROSreactive oxygen species
AChEacetylcholinesterase

References

  1. Nabti, E.; Jha, B.; Hartmann, A. Impact of seaweeds on agricultural crop production as biofertilizer. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 14, 1119–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Singh, R.; Parihar, P.; Singh, M.; Bajguz, A.; Kumar, J.; Singh, S.; Singh, V.P.; Prasad, S.M. Uncovering potential applications of cyanobacteria and algal metabolites in biology, agriculture and medicine: Current status and future prospects. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Asimakis, E.; Shehata, A.A.; Eisenreich, W.; Acheuk, F.; Lasram, S.; Basiouni, S.; Emekçi, M.; Ntougias, S.; Taner, G.; May-Simera, H.; et al. Algae and their metabolites as potential bio-pesticides. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Ibrahim, D.; Ghareeb, R.; Abou El Atta, D.; Azouz, H. Nematicidal properties of methanolic extracts of two marine algae against tomato root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. J. Plant Prot. Pathol. 2021, 12, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Brito-Bello, A.A.; Lopez-Arredondo, D. Bioactive compounds with pesticide activities derived from aged cultures of green microalgae. Biology 2023, 12, 1149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Chanthini, K.M.P.; Deva-Andrews, A.; Kirupaanntha-Rajan, P.; Almutairi, B.O.; Senthil-Nathan, S. Systemic defense induced by fatty acid compounds from marine macroalgae, Chaetomorpha antennina in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) plants alters the susceptibility of the polyphagous agricultural pest, Spodoptera litura Fab. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric. 2024, 11, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Kumar, J.; Ramlal, A.; Mallick, D.; Mishra, V. An overview of some biopesticides and their importance in plant protection for commercial acceptance. Plants 2021, 10, 1185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Veluchamy, C.; Palaniswamy, R. A review on marine algae and its applications. Asian J. Pharm. Clin. Res. 2020, 13, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hamed, S.M.; El-Rhman, A.A.A.; Abdel-Raouf, N.; Ibraheem, I.B.M. Role of marine macroalgae in plant protection and improvement for sustainable agriculture technology. Beni-Suef Univ. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 2018, 7, 104–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Garcés-Fiallos, F.R.; de Quadros, F.M.; de Freitas, M.B. Marine resources with potential in controlling plant diseases. In Advances in the Domain of Environmental Biotechnology; Maddela, N.R., García Cruzatty, L.C., Chakraborty, S., Eds.; Environmental and Microbial Biotechnology; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Petchidurai, G.; Sahayaraj, K.; Al-Shuraym, L.A.; Albogami, B.; Sayed, S.M. Insecticidal activity of tannins from selected brown macroalgae against the cotton leafhopper Amrasca devastans. Plants 2023, 12, 3188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jayaraman, J.; Norrie, J.; Punja, Z.K. Commercial extract from the brown seaweed Ascophyllum nodosum reduces fungal diseases in greenhouse cucumber. J. Appl. Phycol. 2011, 23, 353–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Edwin, P.; Michel, L.-M.; Walter, V.; Rita, S. Utilización de macroalgas para la inducción de mecanismos defensivos ante agentes fitopatógenos causantes de enfermedades foliares en hortalizas. Bionatura 2023, 8, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chanthini, K.M.P.; Rajan, P.K.; Abdel-Megeed, A.; Senthil-Nathan, S. Mechanistic perceptions of the elicitorial resources from the marine kingdom—A paradigm shift in plant defense against insect pests. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2024, 58, 103141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Mishra, A.; Sahni, S.; Kumar, S.; Prasad, B.D. Seaweed—An eco-friendly alternative of agrochemicals in sustainable agriculture. Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2020, 39, 71–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Janapala, V.R. Vector and agricultural pest control. In Springer Handbook of Marine Biotechnology; Kim, S.K., Ed.; Springer Handbooks; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rashed, A.A.; Heikal, Y.M.; Finn, R.D.; Bayoumy, M.H.; El-Harairy, A.; Refaay, D.A. Toxicity of macroalgae extracts to larvae of the northern house mosquito. Life 2024, 14, 1527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Refaay, D.A.; El-Sheekh, M.M.; Heikal, Y.M.; Rashed, A.A. Characterization of some selected macroalgae extracts and assessment of their insecticidal and genotoxicity in Culex pipiens L. mosquito larvae. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 2655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ahmad, R.; Yu, K.X.; Wong, C.-L.; Jantan, I. Larvicidal and adulticidal activities of Malaysian seaweeds against Aedes aegypti (L.) and Aedes albopictus Skuse (Diptera: Culicidae). Southeast Asian J. Trop. Med. Public Health 2016, 47, 719–730. [Google Scholar]
  20. Aravinth, A.D.; Dhanasundaram, S.; Perumal, P.; Kamaraj, C.; Khan, S.U.; Ali, A.; Ragavendran, C.; Amutha, V.; Rajaram, R.; Santhanam, P.; et al. Evaluation of brown and red seaweed extracts as a novel larvicidal agent against the deadly human disease vectors, Anopheles stephensi, Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus. Exp. Parasitol. 2023, 256, 108651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. El-Tabakh, M.A.M.; Elhawary, E.; Hwihy, H.M.; Darweesh, K.F.; Shaapan, R.M.; Ghazala, E.A.; Mokhtar, M.M.; Waheeb, H.O.; Emam, D.; Bakr, N.A.; et al. UPLC/ESI/MS profiling of red algae Galaxaura rugosa extracts and its activity against malaria mosquito vector, Anopheles pharoensis, with reference to Danio rerio and Daphnia magna as bioindicators. Malar. J. 2023, 22, 368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Boutjagualt, I.; Hmimid, F.; Errami, A.; Bouharroud, R.; Qessaoui, R.; Etahiri, S.; Benba, J. Chemical composition and insecticidal effects of brown algae (Fucus spiralis) essential oil against Ceratitis capitata Wiedemann (Diptera: Tephritidae) pupae and adults. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2022, 40, 102308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Abou-Elnaga, Z.S.; Alarif, W.M.; Al-Lihaibi, S.S. New larvicidal acetogenin from the red alga Laurencia papillosa. Clean-Soil Air Water 2011, 39, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Tufan-Cetin, O.; Cetin, H. Use of micro and macroalgae extracts for the control of vector mosquitoes. PeerJ 2023, 11, e16187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. El-Aziz, F.E.-Z.A.A.; Hifney, A.F.; Mohany, M.; Al-Rejaie, S.S.; Banach, A.; Sayed, A.M. Insecticidal activity of brown seaweed (Sargassum latifolium) extract as potential chitin synthase inhibitors: Toxicokinetic and molecular docking approaches. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2023, 160, 645–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sahayaraj, K.; Kalidas, S. Evaluation of nymphicidal and ovicidal effect of a seaweed, Padina pavonica (Linn.) (Phaeophyceae) on cotton pest, Dysdercus cingulatus (Fab.). Indian J. Mar. Sci. 2011, 40, 125–129. [Google Scholar]
  27. Lisha, J.M.; Srinivasan, G.; Shanthi, M.; Mini, M.L.; Vellaikumar, S.; Sujatha, K. Phytochemical profiling and toxicity effect of various seaweed species against diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella L. (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2023, 43, 1633–1648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Selvi, V.V.T.; Arivoli, S.; Tennyson, S. Toxicity of Sargassum wightii to the malaria vector Anopheles stephensi Liston (Diptera: Culicidae). Indian J. Entomol. 2023, 85, 868–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sahayaraj, K.; Ravindran, C.; Thusnavis, M.M. Three green seaweed extracts and their fractions for ecofriendly management of pestiferous insect Spodoptera litura. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 19, 7969–7980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Pasdaran, A.; Hamedi, A.; Mamedov, N.A. Antibacterial and Insecticidal Activity of Volatile Compounds of Three Algae Species of Oman Sea. Int. J. Second. Metab. 2016, 3, 66–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Priya, N.; Raguraman, S.; Bhuvaneswari, K.; Lakshmanan, A.; Kumar, K.C. Lethal Effects of Red Macroalgal Extracts against Tobacco Cutworm, Spodoptera litura Fabricius. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2022, 34, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hasan, N.R.H.; Yogarajalakshmi, P.; Vasantha-Srinivasan, P.; Shehata, W.F.; Radhakrishnan, N.; Jayakodi, S.; Karthi, S.; Senthil-Nathan, S.; Mansour, H.E.H.; Ghazzawy, H.S.; et al. From the Sea to Mosquito Control: The Potential of Halymenia dilatata Marine Alga as an Eco-Friendly Mosquitocidal Agent. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Sahayaraj, K.; Jeeva, Y.M. Nymphicidal and Ovipositional Efficacy of Seaweed Sargassum tenerrimum (J. Agardh) against Dysdercus cingulatus (Fab.) (Pyrrhocoridae). Chil. J. Agric. Res. 2012, 72, 152–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sahayaraj, K.; Asharaja, A.; Ponsankar, A.; Rathi, J.M.; Senthil-Nathan, S. Behavioral Response and Relative Toxicity for the Active Compounds of Caulerpa veravalensis (Thivy and Chauhan) against Nymph of Dysdercus cingulatus (Fab.) (Hemiptera: Pyrrhocoridae). J. Asia Pac. Entomol. 2019, 22, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Rima, M.; Chbani, A.; Roques, C.; Garah, F.E. Comparative Study of the Insecticidal Activity of a High Green Plant (Spinacia oleracea) and a Chlorophytae Algae (Ulva lactuca) Extracts against Drosophila melanogaster Fruit Fly. Ann. Pharm. Fr. 2021, 79, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Ishii, T.; Nagamine, T.; Nguyen, B.C.Q.; Tawata, S. Insecticidal and repellent activities of laurinterol from the Okinawan red alga Laurencia nidifica. Rec. Nat. Prod. 2017, 11, 63–68. [Google Scholar]
  37. Balamurugan, S.; Kannan, R. Bioefficacy Studies on Insecticidal Activities of Sargassum wightii with Neem Oil against Rice Leaf Folder, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis. Uttar Pradesh J. Zool. 2023, 44, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dharani, P.N.; Raguraman, S.; Bhuvaneswari, K.; Lakshmanan, A.; Chandra, K.K. Comparative Toxicity of Aqueous and Methanolic Extracts of Brown Macroalgae against Tobacco Cutworm, Spodoptera litura Fabricius. J. Curr. Crop Sci. Technol. 2022, 109, 82–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. González-Castro, A.L.; Muñoz-Ochoa, M.; Hernández-Carmona, G.; López-Vivas, J.M. Evaluation of seaweed extracts for the control of the Asian citrus psyllid Diaphorina citri. J. Appl. Phycol. 2019, 31, 3815–3821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Argandoña, V.H.; Pozo, T.D.; San-Martín, A.; Rovirosa, J. Insecticidal activity of Plocamium cartilagineum monoterpenes. Bol. Soc. Chil. Quím. 2000, 45, 371–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. González-Castro, A.L.; Rojas Contreras, M.; Romero Bastidas, M.; Águila Ramírez, R.N.; Rangel Dávalos, C.; Arce Amezquita, P.M. Evaluation of some seaweed extracts from Baja Peninsula, Mexico, against plant pathogens. Hidrobiológica 2025, 35, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Perumal, P.; Dhanasundaram, S.; Aravinth, A.D.; Amutha, V.; Santhanam, P. Larvicidal property of the extracts of the seaweeds Sargassum wightii, S. ilicifolium and Gelidiella acerosa against Anopheles stephensi, Aedes aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2022, 43, 102436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Prisa, D.; Fresco, R.; Jamal, A.; Saeed, M.F.; Spagnuolo, D. Exploring the potential of macroalgae for sustainable crop production in agriculture. Life 2024, 14, 1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. González-Castro, A.L.; Torres-Estrada, J.L.; Muñoz-Ochoa, M. Larvicidal and oviposition deterrent activity of sesquiterpenes from the red seaweed Laurencia johnstonii against Aedes aegypti. J. Appl. Phycol. 2024, 36, 1555–1560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Tyśkiewicz, K.; Rüttler, F.; Tyśkiewicz, R.; Nowak, A.; Gruba, M.; Wziątek, A.; Dębczak, A.; Sandomierski, M.; Vetter, W. Antifungal properties of bioactive compounds isolated from Fucus vesiculosus supercritical carbon dioxide extract. Molecules 2024, 29, 5957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Farghl, A.A.M.; El-Sheekh, M.M.; El-Shahir, A.A. Seaweed extracts as biological control of aflatoxins produced by Aspergillus parasiticus and Aspergillus flavus. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2023, 33, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. El Modafar, C.; Elgadda, M.; El Boutachfaiti, R.; Abouraicha, E.; Zehhar, N.; Petit, E.; Courtois, B.; Courtois, J. Induction of natural defense accompanied by salicylic acid-dependent systemic acquired resistance in tomato seedlings in response to bio-elicitors isolated from green algae. Sci. Hortic. 2012, 138, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. El-Sheekh, M.M.; Ahmed, A.Y.; Soliman, S.A.; Abdel-Ghafour, S.E.; Sobhy, H.M. Biological control of soil-borne cucumber diseases using green marine macroalgae. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2021, 31, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sultana, V.; Baloch, G.N.; Ara, J.; Ehteshamul-Haque, S.; Tariq, R.M.; Athar, M. Seaweeds as an alternative to chemical pesticides for the management of root diseases of sunflower and tomato. J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2011, 84, 162–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Vicente, T.F.L.; Lemos, M.F.L.; Félix, R.; Valentão, P.; Félix, C. Marine macroalgae, a source of natural inhibitors of fungal phytopathogens. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Esserti, S.; Smaili, A.; Rifai, L.A.; Koussa, T.; Makroum, K.; Belfaiza, M.; Kabil, E.M.; Faize, L.; Burgos, L.; Alburquerque, N.; et al. Protective effect of three brown seaweed extracts against fungal and bacterial diseases of tomato. J. Appl. Phycol. 2017, 29, 1081–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Flora, G.; Rani, S.M.V. An approach towards control of blast by foliar application of seaweed concentrate. Sci. Res. Rep. 2012, 2, 213–217. [Google Scholar]
  53. Alorfi, H.S. Antifungal–antiproliferative norcycloartane-type triterpenes from the Red Sea green alga Tydemania expeditionis. Open Chem. 2022, 20, 912–919. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Lemesheva, V.; Islamova, R.; Stepchenkova, E.; Shenfeld, A.; Birkemeyer, C.; Tarakhovskaya, E. Antibacterial, Antifungal and Algicidal Activity of Phlorotannins, as Principal Biologically Active Components of Ten Species of Brown Algae. Plants 2023, 12, 821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pourakbar, L.; Moghaddam, S.S.; Enshasy, H.A.E.; Sayyed, R.Z. Antifungal Activity of the Extract of a Macroalgae, Gracilariopsis persica, against Four Plant Pathogenic Fungi. Plants 2021, 10, 1781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ameer Junaithal Begum, M.; Selvaraju, P.; Vijayakumar, A. Evaluation of antifungal activity of seaweed extract (Turbinaria conoides) against Fusarium oxysporum. J. Appl. Nat. Sci. 2016, 8, 60–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Vehapi, M.; Koçer, A.T.; Yılmaz, A.; Özçimen, D. Investigation of the antifungal effects of algal extracts on apple-infecting fungi. Arch. Microbiol. 2020, 202, 455–471. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Vera, J.; Castro, J.; Gonzalez, A.; Moenne, A. Seaweed polysaccharides and derived oligosaccharides stimulate defense responses and protection against pathogens in plants. Mar. Drugs 2011, 9, 2514–2525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Praveen, A.; Kannan, C. Studies on anti-fungal activity of different macro algal extracts against soil borne pathogen Sclerotium rolfsii Sacc. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2023, 35, 1083–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Silva, P.J.; Fernandes, C.; Barros, L.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R.; Pereira, L.; Gonçalves, T. The antifungal activity of extracts of Osmundea pinnatifida, an edible seaweed, indicates its usage as a safe environmental fungicide or as a food additive preventing post-harvest fungal food contamination. Food Funct. 2018, 9, 6187–6195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ambika, S.; Sujatha, K. Antifungal Activity of Brown, Red and Green Alga Seaweed Extracts against Macrophomina phaseolina (Tassi) Goid., in Pigeonpea var. CO (Rg) 7. Int. J. Agric. Sci. 2015, 11, 210–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Chanthini, K.M.-P.; Senthil-Nathan, S. Marine weeds against fungal phytopathogens—Current agronomical implications and intriguing perspectives for a sustainable future. Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 2024, 130, 102240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Soares, F.; Fernandes, C.; Silva, P.J.; Pereira, L.; Gonçalves, T. Antifungal activity of carrageenan extracts from the red alga Chondracanthus teedei var. lusitanicus. J. Appl. Phycol. 2016, 28, 2991–2998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Mohy El-Din, S.M.; Mohyeldin, M.M. Component analysis and antifungal activity of the compounds extracted from four brown seaweeds with different solvents at different seasons. J. Ocean Univ. China 2018, 17, 1178–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Casanova, L.M.; Macrae, A.; de Souza, J.E.; Neves Junior, A.; Vermelho, A.B. The potential of allelochemicals from microalgae for biopesticides. Plants 2023, 12, 1896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Sithole, N.T.; Gupta, S.; Dube, Z.; Ogbe, A.A.; Van Staden, J. Algae and cyanobacteria-based biostimulants in controlling plant-parasitic nematodes: A sustainable approach for crop protection. Phytoparasitica 2023, 51, 803–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ghareeb, R.Y.; Shams El-Din, N.G.E.; Maghraby, D.M.E.; Ibrahim, D.S.; Abdel-Megeed, A.; Abdelsalam, N.R. Nematicidal activity of seaweed-synthesized silver nanoparticles and extracts against Meloidogyne incognita on tomato plants. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 2472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. El-Ansary, M.S.M.; Hamouda, R.A. Biocontrol of root-knot nematode infected banana plants by some marine algae. Russ. J. Mar. Biol. 2014, 40, 140–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Sultana, V.; Ehteshamul-Haque, S.; Ara, J.; Athar, M. Effect of brown seaweeds and pesticides on root rotting fungi and root-knot nematode infecting tomato roots. J. Appl. Bot. Food Qual. 2009, 83, 50–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Ngala, B.M.; Valdes, Y.; dos Santos, G.; Perry, R.N.; Wesemael, W.M.L. Seaweed-based products from Ecklonia maxima and Ascophyllum nodosum as control agents for the root-knot nematodes Meloidogyne chitwoodi and Meloidogyne hapla on tomato plants. J. Appl. Phycol. 2016, 28, 2073–2082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Abdel Rasoul, M.A. Biopotentials of Marine Algae Extracts against Root-Knot Nematode, Meloidogyne incognita. J. Plant Prot. Pathol. 2017, 8, 165–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Khan, S.A.; Abid, M.; Hussain, F. Nematicidal Activity of Seaweeds against Meloidogyne javanica. Pak. J. Nematol. 2015, 33, 195–203. [Google Scholar]
  73. Chukwuma, O.C.; Tan, S.P.; Hughes, H.; McLoughlin, P.; O’Toole, N.; McCarthy, N. The potential of seaweeds as a rich natural source for novel bioherbicide formulation/development. Weed Sci. 2024, 72, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zeb, A. Concept, mechanism, and applications of phenolic antioxidants in foods. J. Food Biochem. 2020, 44, e13394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Chaïb, S.; Pistevos, J.C.A.; Bertrand, C.; Bonnard, I. Allelopathy and allelochemicals from microalgae: An innovative source for bio-herbicidal compounds and biocontrol research. Algal Res. 2021, 54, 102213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Rizvi, M.A.; Shameel, M. Studies on the bioactivity and elementology of marine algae from the coast of Karachi, Pakistan. Phytother. Res. 2004, 18, 865–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Chukwuma, O.C.; Tan, S.P.; Hughes, H.; McLoughlin, P.; O’Toole, N.; McCarthy, N. Evaluating the phytotoxicities of two Irish red seaweeds against common weed species. J. Appl. Phycol. 2023, 36, 727–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Haniffa, H.M.; Ranjith, H.; Dharmaratne, W.; Mohammad, M.Y.; Choudhary, M.I. Allelopathic activity of some Sri Lankan seaweed extracts and the isolation of a new brominated nonaromatic isolaurene-type sesquiterpene from red alga Laurencia heteroclada Harvey. Nat. Prod. Res. 2021, 35, 2020–2027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fonseca, R.R.D.; Ortiz-Ramírez, F.A.; Cavalcanti, D.N.; Ramos, C.J.B.; Teixeira, V.L.; Sousa Filho, A.P.D.S. Allelopathic potential of extracts from the marine macroalga Plocamium brasiliense and their effects on pasture weed. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn. 2012, 22, 850–853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Salehi, B.; Sharifi-Rad, J.; Seca, A.M.L.; Pinto, D.C.G.A.; Michalak, I.; Trincone, A.; Mishra, A.P.; Nigam, M.; Zam, W.; Martins, N. Current trends on seaweeds: Looking at chemical composition, phytopharmacology, and cosmetic applications. Molecules 2019, 24, 4182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Argandoña, V.H.; Rovirosa, J.; San-Martín, A.; Riquelme, A.; Díaz-Marrero, A.R.; Cueto, M.; Darias, J.; Santana, O.; Guadaño, A.; González-Coloma, A. Antifeedant effects of marine halogenated monoterpenes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 7029–7033. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Kjelleberg, S.; Steinberg, P.; Givskov, M.; Gram, L.; Manefield, M.; de Nys, R. Do marine natural products interfere with prokaryotic AHL regulatory systems? Aquat. Microb. Ecol. 1997, 13, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kannan, R.R.R.; Aderogba, M.A.; Ndhlala, A.R.; Stirk, W.A.; Van Staden, J. Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitory Activity of Phlorotannins Isolated from the Brown Alga, Ecklonia maxima (Osbeck) Papenfuss. Food Res. Int. 2013, 54, 1250–1254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Palaniveloo, K.; Ong, K.H.; Satriawan, H.; Abdul Razak, S.; Suciati, S.; Hung, H.-Y.; Hirayama, S.; Rizman-Idid, M.; Tan, J.K.; Yong, Y.S.; et al. In Vitro and In Silico Cholinesterase Inhibitory Potential of Metabolites from Laurencia snackeyi (Weber-van Bosse) M. Masuda. 3 Biotech 2023, 13, 337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Mahmood, N.A.; Carmichael, W.W. Anatoxin-a(S), an Anticholinesterase from the Cyanobacterium Anabaena flos-aquae NRC-525-17. Toxicon 1987, 25, 1221–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Sharanappa, C.H.; Bheemanna, M.; Prabhuraj, A.; Harischandra, N.R.; Nagaraj, M.N.; Saroja, N.R.; Kariyanna, B. Toxicity and Enzymatic Inhibitory Action of Spirulina sp. and Nostoc muscorum Extracts on Detoxifying Enzymes in Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Noctuidae: Lepidoptera). Acta Sci. Biol. Sci. 2024, 46, e68619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. El-Sheekh, M.M.; Mousa, A.S.H.; Farghl, A.A.M. Biological control of Fusarium wilt disease of tomato plants using seaweed extracts. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2020, 45, 4557–4570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Agarwal, P.K.; Agarwal, P.K.; Dangariya, M.; Agarwal, P. Seaweed extracts: Potential biodegradable, environmentally friendly resources for regulating plant defence. Algal Res. 2021, 58, 102363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Sariñana-Aldaco, O.; Benavides-Mendoza, A.; Robledo-Olivo, A.; González-Morales, S. The biostimulant effect of hydroalcoholic extracts of Sargassum spp. in tomato seedlings under salt stress. Plants 2022, 11, 3180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Ali, O.; Ramsubhag, A.; Jayaraman, J. Biostimulant properties of seaweed extracts in plants: Implications towards sustainable crop production. Plants 2021, 10, 531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Gonçalves, A.L. The use of microalgae and cyanobacteria in the improvement of agricultural practices: A review on their biofertilising, biostimulating and biopesticide roles. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Arioli, T.; Mattner, S.W.; Winberg, P.C. Applications of seaweed extracts in Australian agriculture: Past, present and future. J. Appl. Phycol. 2015, 27, 2007–2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Stirk, W.A.; Tarkowská, D.; Turečová, V.; Strnad, M.; Van Staden, J. Abscisic acid, gibberellins and brassinosteroids in Kelpak®, a commercial seaweed extract made from Ecklonia maxima. J. Appl. Phycol. 2014, 26, 561–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Bhattacharjee, M.B. Biopesticides from algae and their potential for sustainable agriculture and environmental protection. Open Access Res. J. Biol. Pharm. 2022, 6, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ali, O.; Ramsubhag, A.; Jayaraman, J. Phytoelicitor activity of Sargassum vulgare and Acanthophora spicifera extracts and their prospects for use in vegetable crops for sustainable crop production. J. Appl. Phycol. 2021, 33, 639–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Dehghan, A.A.; Ghaderi, R. Application of seaweeds in plant disease management. Plant Pathol. Sci. 2020, 9, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Čmiková, N.; Paulen, O.; Mankovecký, J.; Kačániová, M. Potential use of algae and seaweed extracts as protection against peach leaf curl. Acta Hortic. Regiotecturae 2024, 27, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Singh, A.; Sharma, K.; Chahal, H.S.; Kaur, H.; Hasanain, M. Seaweed-derived plant boosters: Revolutionizing sustainable farming and soil health. Front. Soil Sci. 2025, 5, 1504045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Roy, D. Studies on the use of locally available renewable seaweed wastes from Cox’s Bazar and Saint Martin as compost organic fertilizer resources. J. Earth Environ. Sci. Res. 2024, 6, 2–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Elanselvi, A.; Mahalakshmi, P.; Thamizh Iniyan, A.; Harish, S.; Kavitha, M.; Santhana Krishnan, V.P.; Muthukumar, G. Antifungal efficacy of Kappaphycus alvarezii and other macro-algae against Alternaria solani-induced early blight in tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). J. Sci. Res. Rep. 2024, 30, 411–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sahana, B.N.; Prasannakumar, M.K.; Mahesh, H.B.; Parivallal, P.B.; Puneeth, M.E.; Gautam, C.; Girish, T.R.; Nori, S.; Suryanarayan, S. Biostimulants derived from red seaweed stimulate the plant defence mechanism in rice against Magnaporthe oryzae. J. Appl. Phycol. 2021, 34, 659–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. van der Weide, R.Y.; Elissen, H.J.H.; Hol, S.J.E.; Evenhuis, A.; de Vos, R.C.H.; van der Meer, I.M.; van Geel, W.C.A. Agricultural Applications of Seaweed Extracts: Seaweeds for Plant Care—Review and Experiments in the Netherlands; WPR-OT-940; Wageningen Plant Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Siedenburg, J.R.; Attard, E.; Mamo, J.A.; Verschoor, A. Microalgae-based crop support technologies show multifaceted promise well-suited to looming threats. Environments 2024, 11, 220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Costa, J.A.V.; Freitas, B.C.B.; Cruz, C.G.; Silveira, J.; Morais, M.G. Potential of microalgae as biopesticides to contribute to sustainable agriculture and environmental development. J. Environ. Sci. Health B 2019, 54, 366–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Verma, N.; Sehrawat, A.R.; Pandey, D.; Pandey, B.K. Seaweed: A novel organic biomaterial. Curr. J. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2020, 39, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Verma, M.L.; Kumar, A.; Chintagunta, A.D.; Samudrala, P.J.K.; Bardin, M.; Lichtfouse, E. Microbial production of biopesticides for sustainable agriculture. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Omokaro, G.O.; Osarhiemen, I.O.; Idama, V.; Airueghian, E.O.; West, S.; Igbigbi, F.E.; Nnake, D.C.; Obolokor, E.; Ahmed, A.; Omoshie, V.O. The Role of Organic Amendments and Their Impact on Soil Restoration: A Review. Asian J. Environ. Ecol. 2024, 23, 41–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Bennett, J.P.; Robinson, L.F.; Gomez, L.D. Valorisation Strategies for Brown Seaweed Biomass Production in a European Context. Algal Res. 2023, 75, 103248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Renganathan, P.; Gaysina, L.A.; Holguín-Peña, R.J.; Sainz-Hernández, J.C.; Ortega-García, J.; Rueda-Puente, E.O. Phycoremediated Microalgae and Cyanobacteria Biomass as Biofertilizer for Sustainable Agriculture: A Holistic Biorefinery Approach to Promote Circular Bioeconomy. Biomass 2024, 4, 1047–1077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Rashwan, R.S.; Hammad, D.M. Toxic Effect of Spirulina platensis and Sargassum vulgar as Natural Pesticides on Survival and Biological Characteristics of Cotton Leaf Worm Spodoptera littoralis. Sci. Afr. 2020, 8, e00323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Shukla, P.S.; Borza, T.; Critchley, A.T.; Prithiviraj, B. Seaweed-Based Compounds and Products for Sustainable Protection against Plant Pathogens. Mar. Drugs 2021, 19, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Chanthini, K.M.P.; Ramasubramanian, R.; Stanley-Raja, V.; Karthi, S.; Shyam-Sundar, N.; Senthil-Nathan, S. Evaluation of the Ecotoxicology of Seaweed-Based Biopesticide Used in Combat of the Polyphagous Pest Using Eudrilus eugeniae Kinb. In Teratogenicity Testing; Félix, L., Ed.; Methods in Molecular Biology; Humana: New York, NY, USA, 2024; Volume 2753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Aioub, A.A.A.; Ghosh, S.; Al-Farga, A.; Khan, A.N.; Bibi, R.; Elwakeel, A.M.; Nawaz, A.; Sherif, N.T.; Elmasry, S.A.; Ammar, E. Back to the Origins: Biopesticides as Promising Alternatives to Conventional Agrochemicals. Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2024, 169, 697–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Gurau, S.; Imran, M.; Ray, R.L. Algae: A Cutting-Edge Solution for Enhancing Soil Health and Accelerating Carbon Sequestration—A Review. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2025, 37, 103980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Dmytryk, A.; Chojnacka, K. Algae as Fertilizers, Biostimulants, and Regulators of Plant Growth. In Algae Biomass: Characteristics and Applications; Chojnacka, K., Wieczorek, P., Schroeder, G., Michalak, I., Eds.; Developments in Applied Phycology; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Sariñana-Aldaco, O.; Rivera-Solís, L.L.; Benavides-Mendoza, A.; Robledo-Olivo, A.; Rodríguez-Jasso, R.M.; González-Morales, S. Using Brown Algae in the Plant–Soil System: A Sustainable Approach to Improving the Yield and Quality of Agricultural Crops. Horticulturae 2025, 11, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Insecticidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Table 1. Insecticidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Algal SpeciesTarget PestProduct/EffectsReference
Sargassum wightii, Turbinaria ornata (Phaeophyceae)Cotton leafhopper,
Amrasca biguttula		Tannins inhibit amylase, protease, invertase[11]
Actinotrichia fragilis, Liagora ceranoides (Rhodophyta), Sargassum latifolium and Colpomenia sinuosa (Phaeophyceae)Stored-grain pests
Oryzaephilus mercator
Tribolium castaneum, Musca domestica		Chitin synthase inhibition
Volatile oils with 39.6% 1-dodecanol
insecticidal effects		[25,30]
Chaetomorpha antennina (Chlorophyta); Acanthophora spicifera, Gracilaria corticata and Jania rubens (Rhodophyta)Spodoptera lituraFatty acids induce plant defenses
larvicidal and insecticidal effects		[6,31]
Ulva lactuca (Chlorophyta), Turbinaria ornata (Phaeophyceae)Culex pipiens larvaePhenolics, alkaloids cause DNA damage[17]
Halymenia dilatata (Rhodophyta)Aedes aegyptiMidgut damage, enzyme alteration[32]
Padina pavonica (Phaeophyceae)Dysdercus cingulatusNymphicidal and ovicidal activity[26]
Sargassum tenerrimum (Phaeophyceae)Dysdercus cingulatusReduced protein and DNA content[33]
Green seaweeds Caulerpa and Ulva spp. (Chlorophyta)Spodoptera litura
Dysdercus cingulatus
Drosophila melanogaster		Larval mortality and growth inhibition, Fatty acid and other metabolite[29,34,35]
Laurencia nidifica (Rhodophyta)Maize weevil, termitesHalogenated sesquiterpenes inhibit acetylcholinesterase[36]
Sargassum wightii, (Phaeophyceae)
Gracilaria edulis (Rhodophyta)		Diamondback moth Plutella xylostella;
rice leaf folder, Cnaphalocrocis medinalis		Larvicidal effect
contact/feeding toxicity		[27,37]
Padina tetrastromatica, Sargassum wightii and Turbinaria conoides (Phaeophyceae)Lepidopteran tobacco cutworm, Spodoptera lituraLarvicidal effect contact/feeding toxicity[38]
Chaetomorpha antennina (Chlorophyta)Lepidopteran tobacco cutworm, Spodoptera lituraLarvicidal effect contact/feeding toxicity[6]
Fucus spiralis (Phaeophyceae)Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitataEssential oil
contact toxicity on pupae and adults		[22]
Laurencia johnstonii (Rhodophyta) and Sargassum horridum (Phaeophyceae) Asian citrus psyllid,
Diaphorina citri		Insecticidal and repellent effect[39]
Palisada perforata (formerly Laurencia papillosa) (Rhodophyta)Confused flour beetle, Tribolium confusumActive ingredient acetogenin
Larvicidal effect		[23]
Plocamium cartilagineum (Rhodophyta)Tomato moth, Tuta absolute and a cereal aphid, Schizaphis graminumHalogenated monoterpenes, (mertensene and violacene)
larvicidal and insecticidal effects		[40]
Table 2. Fungicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Table 2. Fungicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Algal SpeciesTarget PestProduct/EffectsReference
Gracilariopsis persica (Rhodophyta)Botrytis cinerea, Aspergillus niger, Penicillium expansum, and Pyricularia oryzaePhenolics, fatty acids inhibit growth[55]
Fucus vesiculosus (Phaeophyceae)Fusarium culmorumFatty acids, fucosterol
induced defense enzymes in plants		[45]
Sargassum wightiiSclerotium rolfsiiMethanol extract
retention the antimicrobial activity		[59]
Halimeda opuntia
Turbunaria decurrens
(Phaeophyceae)		A. parasiticus
A. flavus		Growth suppression
Anti-mycotoxigenic effect		[46]
Ulva lactuca (formerly Ulva fasciata), Ulva flexuosa (formerly Enteromorpha flexuosa)Cucumber fungal pathogensGrowth suppression[48]
Osmundea pinnatifida (Rhodophyta)Alternaria infectoria and Aspergillus fumigatusFatty acids,
n-hexane fraction
growth suppression and sporulation		[60]
Sargassum polycystum (formerly Sargassum myriocystum) (Phaeophyceae)Macrophomina phaseolinaAntifungal effects[61]
Chaetomorpha antennina (Chlorophyta)Fungal phytopathogensAlginates, laminarins activate plant defenses[62]
Brown macroalgaeVarious fungiPhlorotannins disrupt fungal membranes[50]
Ascophyllum nodosum
(Phaeophyceae)		Fusarium, Alternaria, Botrytis spp.Induced defense enzymes in plants[12]
Caulerpa (Chlorophyta), Sargassum (Phaeophyceae), Gracilaria (Rhodophyta) spp.Macrophomina phaseolinaAntifungal effect using poison food technique[61]
Solieria robusta (Rhodophyta)Fusarium solaniSuppressive effect[49]
Chondracanthus teedei var. lusitanicus (Rhodophyta)Aspergillus fumigatus and A. infectoriaCarrageenans
growth suppression		[63]
Colpomenia sinuosa, Padina pavonia, Gongolaria barbata (formerly Cystoseira barbata) and Sargassum vulgare (Phaeophyceae)Aspergillus niger, A. flavus, Penicillium parasiticus and F. solaniPolar and nonpolar extracts
antifungal effects		[64]
Table 3. Nematicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Table 3. Nematicidal Activity of Marine Algae.
Algal SpeciesTarget PestProduct/EffectsReference
Multiple Baja California seaweedsMeloidogyne incognitaPhenolics with
nematicidal activity		[44]
Phacelocarpus tristichus, Turbinaria ornataMeloidogyne incognitaSuppressed nematodes, promoted plant growth[4]
Ulva lactuca (formerly Ulva fasciata), Corallina spp. (Rhodophyta), Limnospira platensis (formerly Spirulina platensis) (Cyanobacteria)Meloidogyne incognitaReduced egg hatching, larval survival[71]
Chlorophyta (green microalgae)Model organismsFatty acids, alkaloids show nematicidal effects[5]
32 seaweed speciesMeloidogyne javanicaInhibited egg hatching, larval mortality[72]
Algae and cyanobacteriaPlant-parasitic nematodesSuppression through bioactive compound release[66]
Ascophyllum nodosum and Ecklonia maxima (Phaeophyceae)Meloidogyne chitwoodi and
Meloidogyne hapla		Suppressed nematodes, promoted plant growth[70]
Solieria robusta (Rhodophyta)Meloidogyne javanicaReduced egg hatching and nematode viability[49]
Colpomenia sinuosa (Phaeophyceae) Corallina mediterranea (Rhodophyta, Corallinaceae) Meloidogyne incognitaNanoparticle formulations
nematicidal activity		[67]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Beev, G.; Dermendzhieva, D.; Yaneva, Z.; Kalaydzhiev, G.; Naydenova, N.; Stoeva, D.; Georgieva, D.; Hristova, S.; Beeva, Z.; Petrov, N. Harnessing Marine Algae for Sustainable Agriculture: Natural Bioactive Compounds as Eco-Friendly Pesticidal Agents. Mar. Drugs 2025, 23, 346. https://doi.org/10.3390/md23090346

AMA Style

Beev G, Dermendzhieva D, Yaneva Z, Kalaydzhiev G, Naydenova N, Stoeva D, Georgieva D, Hristova S, Beeva Z, Petrov N. Harnessing Marine Algae for Sustainable Agriculture: Natural Bioactive Compounds as Eco-Friendly Pesticidal Agents. Marine Drugs. 2025; 23(9):346. https://doi.org/10.3390/md23090346

Chicago/Turabian Style

Beev, Georgi, Diyana Dermendzhieva, Zvezdelina Yaneva, Georgi Kalaydzhiev, Nikolina Naydenova, Daniela Stoeva, Denitsa Georgieva, Silviya Hristova, Zornitsa Beeva, and Nikolay Petrov. 2025. "Harnessing Marine Algae for Sustainable Agriculture: Natural Bioactive Compounds as Eco-Friendly Pesticidal Agents" Marine Drugs 23, no. 9: 346. https://doi.org/10.3390/md23090346

APA Style

Beev, G., Dermendzhieva, D., Yaneva, Z., Kalaydzhiev, G., Naydenova, N., Stoeva, D., Georgieva, D., Hristova, S., Beeva, Z., & Petrov, N. (2025). Harnessing Marine Algae for Sustainable Agriculture: Natural Bioactive Compounds as Eco-Friendly Pesticidal Agents. Marine Drugs, 23(9), 346. https://doi.org/10.3390/md23090346

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop