Marine Algal Polyphenols as Skin Protective Agents: Current Status and Future Prospectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The skin is the outermost anatomical barrier, which plays a vital role in the maintenance of internal homeostasis and protection against physical, chemical, and biological detractors. Direct contact with various stimuli leads to several physiological changes that are ultimately important for the growth of the cosmetic industry. Due to the consequences of using synthetic compounds in skincare and cosmeceutical-related industries, the pharmaceutical and scientific communities have recently shifted their focus to natural ingredients. The nutrient-rich value of algae, which are some of the most interesting organisms in marine ecosystems, has attracted attention. Secondary metabolites isolated from seaweeds are potential candidates for a wide range of economic applications, including food, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics. An increasing number of studies have focused on polyphenol compounds owing to their promising biological activities against oxidation, inflammation, allergies, cancers, melanogenesis, aging, and wrinkles. This review summarizes the potential evidence of the beneficial properties and future perspectives of using marine macroalgae-derived polyphenolic compounds for advancing the cosmetic industry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".