Next Article in Journal
Molecular Conductors Based on Dimethylcyclohexene-Fused Tetrathiafulvalene
Previous Article in Journal
Extended Chalcones: Synthesis, In Vitro Analysis, and In Vivo Testing Against a Drosophila melanogaster Alzheimer’s Disease Model
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Chemistry
Volume 6
Issue 6
10.3390/chemistry6060090
chemistry-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

Emerging Trends in Skin Anti-Photoaging by Lactic Acid Bacteria: A Focus on Postbiotics

by
Xiangji Jin
1,
Trang Thi Minh Nguyen
2,
Eun-Ji Yi
2,
Qiwen Zheng
2,
Se-Jig Park
2,
Gyeong-Seon Yi
3,
Su-Jin Yang
2,
Mi-Ju Kim
4 and
Tae-Hoo Yi
2,*
1
Department of Dermatology, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, 26 Kyungheedae-ro, Dong-daemun, Seoul 02447, Republic of Korea
2
Graduate School of Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University, 1732 Deogyeong-daero, Giheung-gu, Yongin 17104, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Biopharmaceutical Biotechnology, Graduate School, Kyung Hee University, 1732 Deogyeong-daero, Giheung-gu, Yongin 17104, Republic of Korea
4
Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Kyung Hee University, 1732 Deogyeong-daero, Giheung-gu, Yongin 17104, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Chemistry 2024, 6(6), 1495-1508; https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry6060090
Submission received: 1 November 2024 / Revised: 20 November 2024 / Accepted: 20 November 2024 / Published: 22 November 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Biological and Natural Products)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Background: Reflecting the increasing interest and research on living a healthy life as society ages, there has been a surge in attention and studies on photodamage. Probiotics have been studied for their ability to enhance skin integrity and provide protection from ultraviolet radiation (UVR). However, despite this, extensive research has revealed various issues and side effects, prompting increased interest in alternative options that can effectively and safely protect the skin. We focused on postbiotics as a promising solution for photodamage, aiming to demonstrate their potential as a safe and stable alternative to probiotics. Methods: We investigated papers on “skin aging” or “photoaging” and “probiotics” or “postbiotics” from 2013 to 2023 using the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. Additionally, we compared and analyzed publications, authors, countries, keywords, and citations using the VOS viewer program. Results: According to our search results, the majority of papers on photodamage and probiotics were published in PubMed, with the United States leading in publication volume among countries. The most common keywords were “photodamage” and “skin”. The most cited paper recorded 470 citations. Furthermore, upon focused analysis of five papers on postbiotics and photodamage, postbiotics demonstrated preventive and protective effects against skin photodamage. Conclusions: Postbiotics for photodamage show potential as a safe and stable alternative to probiotics. However, research on postbiotics and photodamage remains limited, and additional studies and long-term tracking are essential to substantiate our claims.

1. Introduction

Human skin aging is affected by various factors, including intrinsic genetics and extrinsic environmental influences. Intrinsic aging is natural and genetic, occurring gradually with age, while extrinsic aging is mainly due to external factors. One significant contributor is exposure to the sun, which can result in noticeable signs of aging due to damage inflicted by ultraviolet radiation on the skin and can accelerate the aging process [1,2,3]. Solar UVR consists of UVA, UVB, and UVC rays, each with different wavelengths. UVA, with its longer wavelength, penetrates deeply into the dermis, leading to skin issues like wrinkles, pigmentation changes, dryness, dilated blood vessels, and roughness, collectively known as skin photoaging [4,5,6,7]. The occurrence of such phenomena is associated with pathological changes in skin tissues and various cellular alterations among the dermis and epidermis [8,9]. Daily exposure to ultraviolet radiation damages normal skin function, impairs the skin barrier, induces DNA damage, triggers or accelerates skin inflammation, and increases the risk of malignant tumors [10,11,12].
The human microbiota, a conglomerate of microorganisms, constitutes a living ecosystem within (gut) and on the surface (skin) of the body. Primarily situated at the juncture of our internal and external bodily barriers, the microbiome’s principal function is preserving and protecting our health [13,14]. In other studies, it has been observed that the skin microbiome contributes to the aging process by reinforcing the skin’s immune system, protecting the skin barrier, reducing skin inflammation, and maintaining skin elasticity and moisture. In contrast, an imbalance in the skin microbiome can have negative effects on the skin, giving rise to various skin diseases and issues [15,16,17,18,19]. Moreover, according to recent investigations, UVR significantly impacts the skin microbiome community, suggesting that UVR may be a contributing factor to skin pathology [20]. This study provides new insights into the bidirectional interactions between these two barrier organs.
In 1912, the concept of “topical bacteriotherapy”, using Lactobacillus bulgaricus on the skin, was first proposed as a potential treatment for acne and seborrhea. This method entails introducing laboratory-cultured live bacteria at an appropriate dosage to rebalance the skin microbiota and reinstate immune homeostasis [21]. The interactions between the skin microbiota and the probiotics have created promising possibilities in dermatological treatments, offering the potential to manipulate them for the management of various skin conditions. Despite the various advantages, there are limitations, and special caution is necessary when using it. Particularly, it is recommended to use it even more carefully in individuals with compromised immune systems, such as youngsters, seniors, and expectant mothers [22,23]. One of the most noteworthy side effects of probiotics includes the transfer of antibiotic resistance and the potential for bacteremia, along with allergic reactions [24]. Moreover, the demands for probiotics during quality control, storage, and transportation are stringent and subject to various environmental factors such as temperature, humidity, and air conditions [25]. To address these challenges, a recent development in the field of biotics is the emergence of a new component known as postbiotics. Postbiotics, defined as preparations of inanimate microorganisms and/or their components that confer health benefits on the host, must contain inactivated microbial cells or cell components. These may include metabolites that contribute to the observed health benefits [26]. These substances provide a safer and more stable alternative by delivering the beneficial effects of probiotics without the potential risks associated with live microorganisms [27].
Based on the stated background, this study anticipates that postbiotics will have a positive impact on skin photoaging. Through a simultaneous occurrence of word analysis using international scholarly journal databases, this research aims to compare and analyze recent trends and areas in postbiotics and photoaging-related studies. Additionally, this study is anticipated to explore the potential dynamics in the mitigation and therapeutic application of postbiotics skin photoaging, presenting new possibilities in skin aging.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data Collection and Strategy for Data Retrieval

The data were gathered by downloading them in “Plain text” format from the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus. The approach to data collection and retrieval is outlined in Figure 1.
The retrieved publications had to satisfy the specified criteria:
  • Search terms were established through a topic search (TS), encompassing the title, abstract, author’s keywords, and keywords Plus. The criteria were TS = (“skin aging” or “photoaging”) and TS = (“probiotics” or “postbiotics”).
  • The type of document sought was an “article”.
  • The publication timeframe considered was from 2013 to 2023.
  • The subsequent data were gathered, including publications, authors, nations, institutions, journals, keywords, and citations.
The relevance of keywords is calculated by constructing a co-occurrence matrix, normalizing the data to account for varying keyword frequencies, and assigning a relevance score based on how strongly each keyword is associated with others in the network, which is then visualized through mapping and clustering to highlight key themes in the dataset.

2.2. Data Analysis and Network Mapping

Analysis and mapping of data in bibliometrics play a role in tracking the progression and trends of impactful publications. In this present investigation, referring to the method of van Eck NJ and Waltman L, VOS viewer version 1.6.20 was employed for the analysis [28], extracting bibliographic details such as researchers, research institutions, countries or regions, citations, and keywords from downloaded TXT files obtained from the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus to generate visualized network maps. Employing prevalent bibliometric techniques, including co-occurrence and co-citation analyses, revealed collaboration patterns, identified hotspots, and delineated knowledge domains [29]. Centered on investigating the impact of postbiotics on photoaging of the skin, the analysis delved into the top 100 high-frequency keywords. Within VOS viewer visualizations, nodes depicted as labeled circles conveyed varying sizes denoting co-occurrence frequencies. Circle colors indicated cluster affiliations, while link thickness and length conveyed the strength and relevance of connections, with a display limit of 1000 lines highlighting the most robust links between nodes.

2.3. Reference Analysis of Research Paper

The research method involved a comprehensive narrative literature search spanning from 2013 to 2023, covering all available literature in the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases. We employed a combination of search terms tailored to each database, such as “skin aging” and “photoaging”, along with “Probiotics” and “Postbiotics”. These search terms were configured as free-text searches, and the selection criteria for papers were specified to include studies published in English.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Comprehensive Analysis of Research Trends

3.1.1. Results of a Publication Survey on Skin Aging Related to Probiotics and Postbiotics

The comparative analysis of research papers related to “skin aging”, “photoaging”, “probiotics”, and “postbiotics” published on the Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus from 2013 to 2023, totaling 1344 papers, indicates an overall increasing trend over time. Particularly noteworthy is the highest number of papers published on PubMed, totaling 695, and Scopus exhibited the most significant growth, rising from 2 papers in 2013 to 158 papers in 2023, representing a 98.7% increase. This rapid growth reflects a heightened interest in probiotics and postbiotics related to aging. It suggests that researchers are increasingly focusing on this topic, likely influenced by improved living standards and societal development. With a rising awareness of aging, especially photoaging, there is an indication of an increased understanding of these issues. As a result, it can be inferred that research on products or medications that are relatively safe and effective for preventing photoaging is on the rise (Figure 2).

3.1.2. Global Distribution of Research Collaborative Effort

The analysis of the distribution of research in countries and regions included 42 different countries and generated 208 publications (Figure 3). The United States of America documented a total of 27 publications, marking the highest volume of research output generated, closely followed by Italy with 23 publications. The United Kingdom secured the third position in this field of research with 17 publications. When viewed from a global perspective, it is evident that countries worldwide have contributed to publishing papers.

3.1.3. Analysis of Co-Citations Involving Referenced Sources and Keywords

Through comparative analysis of the top 10 most co-cited references in this study (Table 1), it is evident that experiments have been undertaken on various aspects. The research paper authored by Dr. Aguilar-Toalá and colleagues (2018), titled “Postbiotics: An evolving term within the functional foods field”, holds the highest recorded citation count. Notably, the research includes investigations on the photoprotective effects of probiotics, clinical trials related to skin aging with Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, the impact of probiotics on UV-damaged skin, the role of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Cutibacterium acnes in skin microbiota, and the antimicrobial effects of Laticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG on epidermal keratinocytes. In the annual keyword relevance analysis (Table 2, Figure 4), the keyword “photoaging” appeared 608 times, exhibiting the highest frequency and indicating a strong correlation.
Subsequently, “skin” and “probiotics” followed as the next most relevant keywords. Moreover, upon examining the relevance between keywords, it can be observed that “probiotics”, “synbiotics”, and “paraprobiotics” show the highest connectivity. In summary, these results suggest that current research, particularly centered around the skin, is actively progressing in the realm of probiotics and postbiotics. Among these, there is a significant focus on research related to skin aging and photoaging.

3.2. The Research Trends on Photoaging and Lactic Acid Bacteria

3.2.1. Research Trends on Probiotics

Recent findings suggested that probiotics are an efficient component in cosmetics and revealed minimal or no toxicity, showing its viability for skin treatment. However, there are still gaps as to which probiotics directly protect human health in external factors or oxidative stress. Meanwhile, reports noted that Lactococcus sp. and Bifidobacterium sp. show significant impact on human health. As stated by Kim et al. [30], Lactiplantibacillus plantarum HY7714 was confirmed to have an antiphotoaging effect, suppress wrinkle formation, and reduce epidermal thickness via modulation of the expression of MMPs and tissue inhibitors of MMPs (TIMPs). While probiotic bacteria typically hold a Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) status, numerous reports indicate potential side effects arising from their presence. Microorganisms utilized as probiotics may lead to systemic infections, immune system activation, metabolic disruptions, and involvement in horizontal gene transfer [31]. Based on the 2002 guidelines from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) [32], it was claimed that probiotics could be associated with systemic infections, detrimental metabolic activities, heightened immune stimulation in susceptible individuals, gene transfer, and minor gastrointestinal symptoms [33]. These uncertainties, issues, and the lack of established guidelines have prompted safety concerns related to probiotics. Thus, in this paper, our emphasis is on postbiotics, analogous to probiotics, and their ability to protect the skin from external stimuli with minimal side effects, thereby ensuring safety.

3.2.2. Classification Trends of Postbiotics

The term postbiotic originates from Greece and signifies “post” as after and “bios” for life. Thus, postbiotics pertain to substances derived after the microorganisms are no longer alive, inanimate, or inactivated. The components of a postbiotic can consist of whole cells or structural remnants of microbes, such as cell walls [26]. A postbiotic must originate from a precisely identified microorganism or a combination of microorganisms with known genomic sequences. It must be produced through a well-defined technological process of biomass production and inactivation to ensure consistent and reproducible results [34,35]. The fundamental composition of postbiotic components can be categorized based on their basic constituents, encompassing proteins such as lactocepin, p40, and p75 molecules as soluble proteins; lipids including butyrate, propionate, acetate, lactate, and dimethyl acetyl-derived plasmalogen; carbohydrates consisting of galactose-rich polysaccharides and teichoic acids; organic acids like propionic and 3-phenyl lactic acid; B-group vitamins; and complex molecules such as lipoteichoic acids and peptidoglycan-derived muropeptides (Figure 5) [36].
These effects include immunomodulation, antioxidant properties, cholesterol reduction, blood pressure regulation, anti-inflammatory actions, and the inhibition of cell proliferation [37]. Postbiotics emerge as a novel avenue for topical applications [38], which has not yet been sufficiently explored. Recently, a significant surge in understanding the origins, prevalence, and preventive measures against the immediate and prolonged repercussions of oxidative stress [39,40,41] and prolonged exposure to UV radiation has been observed [42,43,44]. Therefore, it is essential to discover novel, mainly natural substances that are capable of actively reacting with free radicals and UV filters for the prevention of oxidative damage caused by UVR. Postbiotics can reinforce the skin barrier, enhancing protection against external factors [45]. This can be helpful in preventing damage from UVR. Additionally, when applied to the epidermal cells and fibroblasts, which are among the largest organs in the human body, postbiotics contribute to strengthening the skin barrier [46]. This enhancement of protective functions against the external environment supports skin health. Furthermore, some postbiotics have the potential to reduce inflammation and promote skin regeneration, exerting beneficial effects on the skin [47].
Unlike probiotics, postbiotics exhibit a higher specificity in their action on the resident microflora and their interactions with host cells. Postbiotics are produced through bio fermentation processes. The majority of these compounds are typically obtained from LAB, specifically the Lactobacillus genera (pre-reclassification) or Saccharomyces cerevisiae [26,48,49]. Postbiotics encompass a range of substances, progressing from metabolites like teichoic acids to polysaccharides, among other compounds. They demonstrate significant biological attributes, including inhibition effects against oxidant, inflammatory, proliferative, and controlling immunomodulatory properties [50]. Furthermore, postbiotics demonstrate prolonged shelf life and heightened safety in comparison to probiotics [51].

3.3. Limitations and Future Trends

In light of the pertinent safety concerns, a multitude of clinical investigations have been undertaken, providing substantiation regarding the favorable absorption, metabolic pathways, and distribution patterns of postbiotics. Moreover, these bioactive agents have been demonstrated to elicit signaling responses within various organs of the host, underscoring their potential health-related benefits [52]. Regarding postbiotic safety considerations, a randomized controlled clinical trial in approximately 1750 children focused on the function of postbiotics in the prevention and treatment of infections in children under 5 years of age and found no potential adverse effects [53]. Another study found that Lactobacillus gasseri TMC0356 in heat-deactivated form was identified as having the capability to boost specific elements of cellular immune response in older individuals [54]. L. plantarum L-137 in heat-deactivated form was observed to boost the natural defense system of the human body, specifically through the increased production of type I interferon [55]. It also enhanced acquired immunity, especially functions related to Th1, in adults who were in good health [56]. Moreover, the everyday intake of heat-treated L. plantarum L-137 led to enhancements in indicators associated with fatty acid processing and substances causing inflammation in individuals classified as overweight but otherwise in good health [57]. Postbiotics offer benefits for industrial production, stability over a wide range of temperatures, prolonged shelf life, and user-friendly application and storage. They exhibit unique characteristics, such as safe profiles, the absence of toxicity, and resilience in digestive systems [58]. In contrast, cases of side effects related to probiotics consistently appear. Dr. Embden explored how three probiotic strains (L. acidophilus, Bifidobacterium sp., and L. rhamnosus GG) present in fermented dairy products can degrade the mucus [59]. Adverse effects have also been found between yeast and probiotics. Approximately 30 instances of fungemia have been documented in individuals who received treatment with Saccharomyces boulardii, and the source of infection in two cases has been linked to L. rhamnosus acquired through contaminated food [60]. Reported instances of infection, such as endocarditis and septicemia, induced by bifidobacterial, lactobacilli, or other types of lactic acid bacteria, were documented [61]. Therefore, when we searched for keywords associated with probiotics (Figure 6), terms such as preterm infant, late-onset sepsis, and necrotizing enterocolitis were identified. On the other hand, associated keywords related to postbiotics did not reveal any other side effects, and the mentioned risk keywords suggested a lower risk compared to probiotics. Consequently, postbiotics emerge as secure alternatives to live probiotic microorganisms, holding potential for application across the food and pharmaceutical sectors [62].
In the past few years, a steady rise in documented adverse effects linked to probiotics has been observed. Common symptoms include abdominal bloating, abdominal pain, diarrhea, and in severe cases, even sepsis, potentially leading to death [35]. Particular caution is necessary for vulnerable populations such as those with immune disorders, cancer patients, the elderly, and children when considering probiotic use. In contrast, postbiotics, known for their lack of live strains, exhibit relatively fewer side effects, providing a stable and safe option [31]. As the interest in postbiotics as an alternative to probiotics grows, research is exploring their impact on the skin microbiome and aging. While studies on probiotics and aging are abundant, research on postbiotics, especially concerning photoaging, remains limited. However, the author suggests that postbiotics may offer protective effects against photoaging. To support this, the author compared nine recent experimental papers on aging using postbiotics (Table 3) and summarizes the mechanism explanation for photoaging in Figure 7.
DiMarzio et al. studied ceramide levels with the application of Streptococcus thermophilus topical cream on the corneum layer among healthy elder females after two weeks of use, resulting in a significant increase in ceramide levels in stratum corneum [63].
Majeed et al. explored LactoSporin, derived from Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856, for its antioxidant effects on human skin cells, discovering its protection against UV-induced cell damage, inhibition of collagen- and elastin-degrading enzymes, and promotion of essential skin component production [64].
Zhang et al. found that Bacillus amyloliquefaciens lysate (BAL1) protects the skin from aging by activating antioxidant genes, enhancing TGF-β/Smad signaling, and reducing matrix-degrading enzymes [65].
Xu et al. discovered that Lacti-caseibacillus paracasei (PL) protected skin cells from UVB damage and aging by enhancing antioxidant activity, reducing markers of aging, and inhibiting pigmentation enzymes in melanoma cells [66].
Postbiotics derived from a Micrococcus luteus YM-4 culture filtrate mitigated collagen degradation caused by UVB while promoting the synthesis of collagen, suggesting an anti-aging effect, and fastening wound healing by promoting cell migration and proliferation [67].
Based on the comprehensive analysis of the experiments, it can be inferred that postbiotics exert a protective effect against photoaging, operating through various mechanisms. Therefore, the author considers postbiotics as a potential alternative to probiotics, believing in their diverse actions and possibilities. However, since there is still limited experimentation and clinical trials are restricted, more extensive research and experimentation should be conducted in the future to further support their efficacy.

4. Conclusions

Probiotics have been proven to be effective in preventing and treating photoaging. It is widely known that probiotics, having undergone human safety evaluations, are generally considered safe products. However, issues related to the storage and distribution of live cultures and other commercialization problems have been reported, along with occasional side effects and safety concerns following consumption. Considering these factors, postbiotics are evaluated as safe and stable new functional products capable of replacing probiotics. Therefore, the author anticipates through this paper that postbiotics will become a safe and efficient product capable of replacing probiotics.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, X.J. and T.-H.Y.; methodology, T.T.M.N.; software, X.J.; validation, E.-J.Y. and M.-J.K.; formal analysis, X.J.; investigation, S.-J.P. and G.-S.Y.; resources, E.-J.Y. and M.-J.K.; data curation, Q.Z.; writing—original draft preparation, X.J.; writing—review and editing, X.J. and T.T.M.N.; visualization, M.-J.K. and Q.Z.; supervision, T.-H.Y.; project administration, T.-H.Y. and S.-J.Y.; funding acquisition, T.-H.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Tea Hoo Yi and Mi-Ju Kim for their technical support in conducting this research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Gilchrest, B.A. Photoaging. J. Investig. Dermatol. 2013, 133, E2–E6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Scharffetter–Kochanek, K.; Brenneisen, P.; Wenk, J.; Herrmann, G.; Ma, W.; Kuhr, L.; Meewes, C.; Wlaschek, M. Photoaging of the Skin from Phenotype to Mechanisms. Exp. Gerontol. 2000, 35, 307–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Cavinato, M.; Jansen-Dürr, P. Molecular Mechanisms of UVB-Induced Senescence of Dermal Fibroblasts and Its Relevance for Photoaging of the Human Skin. Exp. Gerontol. 2017, 94, 78–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chien, A.L.; Qi, J.; Grandhi, R.; Kim, N.; César, S.S.A.; Harris-Tryon, T.; Jang, M.S.; Olowoyeye, O.; Kuhn, D.; Leung, S.; et al. Effect of Age, Gender, and Sun Exposure on Ethnic Skin Photoaging: Evidence Gathered Using a New Photonumeric Scale. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 2018, 110, 176–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Kang, S.; Fisher, G.J.; Voorhees, J.J. Photoaging and Topical Tretinoin: Therapy, Pathogenesis, and Prevention. Arch. Dermatol. 1997, 133, 1280–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kligman, A.M. Early Destructive Effect of Sunlight on Human Skin. JAMA 1969, 210, 2377–2380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Vierkötter, A.; Hüls, A.; Yamamoto, A.; Stolz, S.; Krämer, U.; Matsui, M.S.; Morita, A.; Wang, S.; Li, Z.; Jin, L.; et al. Extrinsic Skin Ageing in German, Chinese and Japanese Women Manifests Differently in All Three Groups Depending on Ethnic Background, Age and Anatomical Site. J. Dermatol. Sci. 2016, 83, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Shah, H.; Rawal Mahajan, S. Photoaging: New Insights into Its Stimulators, Complications, Biochemical Changes and Therapeutic Interventions. Biomed. Aging Pathol. 2013, 3, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Wohlrab, J.; Hilpert, K.; Wohlrab, A. Besonderheiten Der Altershaut. Der Hautarzt 2014, 65, 911–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Hashizume, H. Skin Aging and Dry Skin. J. Dermatol. 2004, 31, 603–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Orioli, D.; Dellambra, E. Epigenetic Regulation of Skin Cells in Natural Aging and Premature Aging Diseases. Cells 2018, 7, 268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Goukassian, D.A.; Gilchrest, B.A. The Interdependence of Skin Aging, Skin Cancer, and DNA Repair Capacity: A Novel Perspective with Therapeutic Implications. Rejuvenation Res. 2004, 7, 175–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Valdes, A.M.; Walter, J.; Segal, E.; Spector, T.D. Role of the Gut Microbiota in Nutrition and Health. BMJ 2018, 361, k2179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. The Human Microbiome Project Consortium. Structure, Function and Diversity of the Healthy Human Microbiome. Nature 2012, 486, 207–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Johnson, T.; Gómez, B.; McIntyre, M.; Dubick, M.; Christy, R.; Nicholson, S.; Burmeister, D. The Cutaneous Microbiome and Wounds: New Molecular Targets to Promote Wound Healing. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018, 19, 2699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kim, H.-J.; Kim, J.J.; Myeong, N.R.; Kim, T.; Kim, D.; An, S.; Kim, H.; Park, T.; Jang, S.I.; Yeon, J.H.; et al. Segregation of Age-Related Skin Microbiome Characteristics by Functionality. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 16748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Jugé, R.; Rouaud-Tinguely, P.; Breugnot, J.; Servaes, K.; Grimaldi, C.; Roth, M.-P.; Coppin, H.; Closs, B. Shift in Skin Microbiota of Western European Women across Aging. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2018, 125, 907–916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Ellis, S.R.; Nguyen, M.; Vaughn, A.R.; Notay, M.; Burney, W.A.; Sandhu, S.; Sivamani, R.K. The Skin and Gut Microbiome and Its Role in Common Dermatologic Conditions. Microorganisms 2019, 7, 550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Grice, E.A.; Segre, J.A. The Skin Microbiome. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2011, 9, 244–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Burns, E.M.; Ahmed, H.; Isedeh, P.N.; Kohli, I.; Van Der Pol, W.; Shaheen, A.; Muzaffar, A.F.; Al-Sadek, C.; Foy, T.M.; Abdelgawwad, M.S.; et al. Ultraviolet Radiation, Both UVA and UVB, Influences the Composition of the Skin Microbiome. Exp. Dermatol. 2019, 28, 136–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Bowe, W.P.; Logan, A.C. Acne Vulgaris, Probiotics and the Gut-Brain-Skin Axis—Back to the Future? Gut Pathog. 2011, 3, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Romagnani, S. Coming Back to a Missing Immune Deviation as the Main Explanatory Mechanism for the Hygiene Hypothesis. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2007, 119, 1511–1513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Evivie, S.E.; Huo, G.-C.; Igene, J.O.; Bian, X. Some Current Applications, Limitations and Future Perspectives of Lactic Acid Bacteria as Probiotics. Food Nutr. Res. 2017, 61, 1318034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Suez, J.; Zmora, N.; Segal, E.; Elinav, E. The Pros, Cons, and Many Unknowns of Probiotics. Nat. Med. 2019, 25, 716–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lee, G.R.; Maarouf, M.; Hendricks, A.J.; Lee, D.E.; Shi, V.Y. Topical Probiotics: The Unknowns behind Their Rising Popularity. Dermatol. Online J. 2019, 25, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Salminen, S.; Collado, M.C.; Endo, A.; Hill, C.; Lebeer, S.; Quigley, E.M.M.; Sanders, M.E.; Shamir, R.; Swann, J.R.; Szajewska, H.; et al. The International Scientific Association of Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) Consensus Statement on the Definition and Scope of Postbiotics. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2021, 18, 649–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tsilingiri, K.; Barbosa, T.; Penna, G.; Caprioli, F.; Sonzogni, A.; Viale, G.; Rescigno, M. Probiotic and Postbiotic Activity in Health and Disease: Comparison on a Novel Polarised Ex-Vivo Organ Culture Model. Gut 2012, 61, 1007–1015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software Survey: VOSviewer, a Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics 2010, 84, 523–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Romero, L.; Portillo-Salido, E. Trends in Sigma-1 Receptor Research: A 25-Year Bibliometric Analysis. Front. Pharmacol. 2019, 10, 564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kim, H.M.; Lee, D.E.; Park, S.D.; Kim, Y.-T.; Kim, Y.J.; Jeong, J.W.; Jang, S.S.; Ahn, Y.-T.; Sim, J.-H.; Huh, C.-S.; et al. Oral Administration of Lactobacillus plantarum HY7714 Protects Hairless Mouse Against Ultraviolet B-Induced Photoaging. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2014, 24, 1583–1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zawistowska-Rojek, A.; Tyski, S. Are Probiotic Really Safe for Humans? Pol. J. Microbiol. 2018, 67, 251–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Joint WHO/FAO/UNU Expert Consultation. Protein and Amino Acid Requirements in Human Nutrition. World Health Organ. Tech. Rep. Ser. 2007, 1–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Doron, S.; Snydman, D.R. Risk and Safety of Probiotics. Clin. Infect. Dis. Off. Publ. Infect. Dis. Soc. Am. 2015, 60 (Suppl. S2), S129–S134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Natarajan, V.T.; Ganju, P.; Ramkumar, A.; Grover, R.; Gokhale, R.S. Multifaceted Pathways Protect Human Skin from UV Radiation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2014, 10, 542–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mohania, D.; Chandel, S.; Kumar, P.; Verma, V.; Digvijay, K.; Tripathi, D.; Choudhury, K.; Mitten, S.K.; Shah, D. Ultraviolet Radiations: Skin Defense-Damage Mechanism. In Ultraviolet Light in Human Health, Diseases and Environment; Ahmad, S.I., Ed.; Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume 996, pp. 71–87. ISBN 978-3-319-56016-8. [Google Scholar]
  36. Dunand, E.; Burns, P.; Binetti, A.; Bergamini, C.; Peralta, G.H.; Forzani, L.; Reinheimer, J.; Vinderola, G. Postbiotics Produced at Laboratory and Industrial Level as Potential Functional Food Ingredients with the Capacity to Protect Mice against Salmonella Infection. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2019, 127, 219–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Shenderov, B.A. Metabiotics: Novel Idea or Natural Development of Probiotic Conception. Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 2013, 24, 20399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kaur, S.; Thukral, S.K.; Kaur, P.; Samota, M.K. Perturbations Associated with Hungry Gut Microbiome and Postbiotic Perspectives to Strengthen the Microbiome Health. Future Foods 2021, 4, 100043. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Li, C.-C.; Lin, L.-H.; Lee, H.-T.; Tsai, J.-R. Avobenzone Encapsulated in Modified Dextrin for Improved UV Protection and Reduced Skin Penetration. Chem. Pap. 2016, 70, 840–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Baker, L.A.; Marchetti, B.; Karsili, T.N.V.; Stavros, V.G.; Ashfold, M.N.R. Photoprotection: Extending Lessons Learned from Studying Natural Sunscreens to the Design of Artificial Sunscreen Constituents. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2017, 46, 3770–3791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Garmyn, M.; Young, A.R.; Miller, S.A. Mechanisms of and Variables Affecting UVR Photoadaptation in Human Skin. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2018, 17, 1932–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ácsová, A.; Hojerová, J.; Tobolková, B.; Martiniaková, S. Antioxidant Efficacy of Natural Ubiquinol Compared to Synthetic References—In Vitro Study. ChemistrySelect 2021, 6, 4495–4505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Hojerová, J.; Medovcíková, A.; Mikula, M. Photoprotective Efficacy and Photostability of Fifteen Sunscreen Products Having the Same Label SPF Subjected to Natural Sunlight. Int. J. Pharm. 2011, 408, 27–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Klimová, Z.; Hojerová, J.; Beránková, M. Skin Absorption and Human Exposure Estimation of Three Widely Discussed UV Filters in Sunscreens—In Vitro Study Mimicking Real-Life Consumer Habits. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2015, 83, 237–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ácsová, A.; Hojerová, J.; Janotková, L.; Bendová, H.; Jedličková, L.; Hamranová, V.; Martiniaková, S. The Real UVB Photoprotective Efficacy of Vegetable Oils: In Vitro and in Vivo Studies. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 2021, 20, 139–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fiorani, M.; Tohumcu, E.; Del Vecchio, L.E.; Porcari, S.; Cammarota, G.; Gasbarrini, A.; Ianiro, G. The Influence of Helicobacter Pylori on Human Gastric and Gut Microbiota. Antibiotics 2023, 12, 765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Dreher, F.; Jungman, E.J.; Sakamoto, K.; Maibach, H.I. (Eds.) Handbook of Cosmetic Science and Technology, 5th ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022; ISBN 978-0-367-46997-9. [Google Scholar]
  48. Maguire, M.; Maguire, G. The Role of Microbiota, and Probiotics and Prebiotics in Skin Health. Arch. Dermatol. Res. 2017, 309, 411–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zheng, J.; Wittouck, S.; Salvetti, E.; Franz, C.M.A.P.; Harris, H.M.B.; Mattarelli, P.; O’Toole, P.W.; Pot, B.; Vandamme, P.; Walter, J.; et al. A Taxonomic Note on the Genus Lactobacillus: Description of 23 Novel Genera, Emended Description of the Genus Lactobacillus Beijerinck 1901, and Union of Lactobacillaceae and Leuconostocaceae. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2020, 70, 2782–2858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Rafique, N.; Jan, S.Y.; Dar, A.H.; Dash, K.K.; Sarkar, A.; Shams, R.; Pandey, V.K.; Khan, S.A.; Amin, Q.A.; Hussain, S.Z. Promising Bioactivities of Postbiotics: A Comprehensive Review. J. Agric. Food Res. 2023, 14, 100708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Duarte, M.; Oliveira, A.L.; Oliveira, C.; Pintado, M.; Amaro, A.; Madureira, A.R. Current Postbiotics in the Cosmetic Market—An Update and Development Opportunities. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2022, 106, 5879–5891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Perez, M.; Astó, E.; Huedo, P.; Alcántara, C.; Buj, D.; Espadaler, J. Derived Postbiotics of a Multi-strain Probiotic Formula Clinically Validated for the Treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome. FASEB J. 2020, 34, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Tomasik, P.; Tomasik, P. Probiotics, Non-Dairy Prebiotics and Postbiotics in Nutrition. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 1470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Dotaniya, M.L.; Datta, S.C.; Biswas, D.R.; Dotaniya, C.K.; Meena, B.L.; Rajendiran, S.; Regar, K.L.; Lata, M. Use of Sugarcane Industrial By-Products for Improving Sugarcane Productivity and Soil Health. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2016, 5, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Guerra, S.P.S.; Denadai, M.S.; Saad, A.L.M.; Spadim, E.R.; Da Costa, M.X.R. Sugarcane Biorefinery, Technology and Perspectives; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; ISBN 978-0-12-814236-3. [Google Scholar]
  56. Ruseler-van Embden, J.G.H.; Van Lieshout, L.M.C.; Gosselink, M.J.; Marteau, P. Inability of Lactobacillus Casei Strain GG, L. Acidophilus, and Bifidobacterium Bifidum to Degrade Intestinal Mucus Glycoproteins. Scand. J. Gastroenterol. 1995, 30, 675–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Kim, S.; Kim, G.-H.; Cho, H. Postbiotics for Cancer Prevention and Treatment. Korean J. Microbiol. 2021, 57, 142–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hennequin, C.; Kauffmann-Lacroix, C.; Jobert, A.; Viard, J.P.; Ricour, C.; Jacquemin, J.L.; Berche, P. Possible Role of Catheters in Saccharomyces Boulardii Fungemia. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2000, 19, 16–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Rautio, M.; Jousimies-Somer, H.; Kauma, H.; Pietarinen, I.; Saxelin, M.; Tynkkynen, S.; Koskela, M. Liver Abscess Due to a Lactobacillus Rhamnosus Strain Indistinguishable from L. rhamnosus Strain GG. Clin. Infect. Dis. 1999, 28, 1159–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Gasser, F. Safety of Lactic Acid Bacteria and Their Occurrence in Human Clinical Infections. Bull. L’Inst. Pasteur 1994, 92, 45–67. [Google Scholar]
  61. Yang, X.; Liang, Q.; Chen, Y.; Wang, B. Alteration of Methanogenic Archaeon by Ethanol Contribute to the Enhancement of Biogenic Methane Production of Lignite. Front. Microbiol. 2019, 10, 2323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Alokika; Anu; Kumar, A.; Kumar, V.; Singh, B. Cellulosic and Hemicellulosic Fractions of Sugarcane Bagasse: Potential, Challenges and Future Perspective. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 169, 564–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Dimarzio, L.; Cinque, B.; Cupelli, F.; De Simone, C.; Cifone, M.G.; Giuliani, M. Increase of Skin-Ceramide Levels in Aged Subjects Following a Short-Term Topical Application of Bacterial Sphingomyelinase from Streptococcus thermophilus. Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2008, 21, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Majeed, M.; Majeed, S.; Nagabhushanam, K.; Lawrence, L.; Arumugam, S.; Mundkur, L. Skin Protective Activity of LactoSporin-the Extracellular Metabolite from Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856. Cosmetics 2020, 7, 76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zhang, Y.; Zhao, J.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, D.; Zhao, D.; Wang, C.; Li, M. Bacillus Amyloliquefaciens Lysate Ameliorates Photoaging of Human Skin Fibroblasts through NRF2/KEAP1 and TGF-β/SMAD Signaling Pathways. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 9151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Xu, J.; Zhang, X.; Song, Y.; Zheng, B.; Wen, Z.; Gong, M.; Meng, L. Heat-Killed Lacticaseibacillus paracasei Ameliorated UVB-Induced Oxidative Damage and Photoaging and Its Underlying Mechanisms. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 1875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Heo, Y.M.; Lee, D.-G.; Mun, S.; Kim, M.; Baek, C.; Lee, H.; Yun, S.K.; Kang, S.; Han, K. Skin Benefits of Postbiotics Derived from Micrococcus luteus Derived from Human Skin: An Untapped Potential for Dermatological Health. Genes Genom. 2024, 46, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chemistry 06 00090 g001
Figure 1. The strategy for collecting and retrieving data.
Figure 1. The strategy for collecting and retrieving data.
Chemistry 06 00090 g001
Chemistry 06 00090 g002
Figure 2. Research papers distributed on Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus in 2013–2023 with “skin aging”, “photoaging” and the association with “probiotics” and “postbiotics”.
Figure 2. Research papers distributed on Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus in 2013–2023 with “skin aging”, “photoaging” and the association with “probiotics” and “postbiotics”.
Chemistry 06 00090 g002
Chemistry 06 00090 g003
Figure 3. Distribution of countries or regions in number of publications. (a) Represented on the global map and (b) illustrated through a graph.
Figure 3. Distribution of countries or regions in number of publications. (a) Represented on the global map and (b) illustrated through a graph.
Chemistry 06 00090 g003
Chemistry 06 00090 g004
Figure 4. Cluster analysis of top 100 keywords based on co-occurrences.
Figure 4. Cluster analysis of top 100 keywords based on co-occurrences.
Chemistry 06 00090 g004
Chemistry 06 00090 g005
Figure 5. The main components of postbiotics.
Figure 5. The main components of postbiotics.
Chemistry 06 00090 g005
Chemistry 06 00090 g006
Figure 6. Recent studies on probiotics and probiotic safety. (a) Premise of research trends, (b) keywords related to the stability of probiotics, and (c) keywords related to the stability of postbiotics.
Figure 6. Recent studies on probiotics and probiotic safety. (a) Premise of research trends, (b) keywords related to the stability of probiotics, and (c) keywords related to the stability of postbiotics.
Chemistry 06 00090 g006
Chemistry 06 00090 g007
Figure 7. Description of the mechanism of anti-photoaging by postbiotic.
Figure 7. Description of the mechanism of anti-photoaging by postbiotic.
Chemistry 06 00090 g007
Table 1. The references with the highest co-citation frequency in the top 10 positions.
Table 1. The references with the highest co-citation frequency in the top 10 positions.
YearJournalTitleCitations
2018Trends in Food Science and TechnologyPostbiotics: An evolving term within the functional foods field470
2015International Journal of Women’s DermatologyThe effect of probiotics on immune regulation, acne, and photoaging105
2014Beneficial microbesImpact of prebiotics and probiotics on skin health105
2020MicroorganismsUpdate of probiotics in human world: A nonstop source of benefactions until the end of time94
2015Journal of Microbiology and BiotechnologyClinical evidence of effects of Lactobacillus plantarum HY7714 on skin aging: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study84
2010British Journal of DermatologyClinical evidence of benefits of a dietary supplement containing probiotics and carotenoids on ultraviolet-induced skin damage74
2020MicroorganismsStaphylococcus epidermidis and Cutibacterium acnes: Two major sentinels of skin microbiota and the influence of cosmetics72
2021MoleculesAdvantages of hyaluronic acid and its combination with other bioactive ingredients in cosmeceuticals71
2015Critical Reviews in Food Science and NutritionHealth Effects of Probiotics on the Skin65
2014Applied and Environmental MicrobiologyLactobacillus rhamnosus GG inhibits the toxic effects of Staphylococcus aureus on epidermal keratinocytes50
Table 2. The list of top 20 keywords.
Table 2. The list of top 20 keywords.
KeywordOccurrencesRelevance
1Photoaging6080.86
2Skin4540.68
3Probiotics2201.42
4Health2170.60
5Matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)1971.35
6UVB1941.32
7Gut microbiota1881.26
8Metabolite1820.93
9Matrix metalloproteinase1541.37
10Microbiota1481.27
11Collagen1171.12
12Synbiotics971.54
13Safety960.61
14Wrinkle880.96
15Immune system790.94
16Lactic acid bacterium790.91
17Fibroblast741.20
18Photodamage530.85
19Dermis531.18
20Paraprobiotic501.40
Table 3. Selected studies on the skin aging benefits of postbiotics.
Table 3. Selected studies on the skin aging benefits of postbiotics.
PostbioticType of AnalysisMain Effects and MechanismsReference
Streptococcus thermophilus produces topical sphingomyelinaseClinical trial
(cream)		Skin ceramide levels increase[63]
Bacillus coagulans MTCC 5856 form spore and produce LactoSporin (The extracellular metabolite)In vitro (HDF cell)LactoSporin suppressed the activity of collagenase, hyaluronidase, and elastase while increasing epidermal growth factor, transforming growth factor, and hyaluronan synthase. This was done to safeguard skin cells from programmed cell death and cellular demise induced by UV exposure.[64]
Bacillus amyloliquefaciens lysate (BAL1)In vitro
(CCC-ESF-1)		BAL1 has the capability to boost the response to oxidation stress and fortify the defensive mechanism against aging by UV in fibroblasts of the skin.[65]
Heat-killed Lacticaseibacillus paracasei (PL)In vitro
(NHDF and B16F10 murine melanoma cells)		By inhibiting signaling pathways such as c-Fos, JNK, c-Jun, and p38 in skin cells, wrinkles were diminished, leading to the attenuation of UVB-induced photoaging. This effect was associated with an enhancement in type I collagen levels[66]
Postbiotics isolated from Micrococcus luteus YM-4 on human skinIn vitro
(HaCaT cell)		Genes expression associated with skin hydration, synthesis of hyaluronic acid, skin barrier, and cell viability was elevated by the culture filtrate of YM-4[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

Jin, X.; Nguyen, T.T.M.; Yi, E.-J.; Zheng, Q.; Park, S.-J.; Yi, G.-S.; Yang, S.-J.; Kim, M.-J.; Yi, T.-H. Emerging Trends in Skin Anti-Photoaging by Lactic Acid Bacteria: A Focus on Postbiotics. Chemistry 2024, 6, 1495-1508. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry6060090

AMA Style

Jin X, Nguyen TTM, Yi E-J, Zheng Q, Park S-J, Yi G-S, Yang S-J, Kim M-J, Yi T-H. Emerging Trends in Skin Anti-Photoaging by Lactic Acid Bacteria: A Focus on Postbiotics. Chemistry. 2024; 6(6):1495-1508. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry6060090

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jin, Xiangji, Trang Thi Minh Nguyen, Eun-Ji Yi, Qiwen Zheng, Se-Jig Park, Gyeong-Seon Yi, Su-Jin Yang, Mi-Ju Kim, and Tae-Hoo Yi. 2024. "Emerging Trends in Skin Anti-Photoaging by Lactic Acid Bacteria: A Focus on Postbiotics" Chemistry 6, no. 6: 1495-1508. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry6060090

APA Style

Jin, X., Nguyen, T. T. M., Yi, E.-J., Zheng, Q., Park, S.-J., Yi, G.-S., Yang, S.-J., Kim, M.-J., & Yi, T.-H. (2024). Emerging Trends in Skin Anti-Photoaging by Lactic Acid Bacteria: A Focus on Postbiotics. Chemistry, 6(6), 1495-1508. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemistry6060090

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop