4.6 Article

New Insights Into the Skin Microbial Communities and Skin Aging

期刊

FRONTIERS IN MICROBIOLOGY
卷 11, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2020.565549

关键词

skin microbiomes; intrinsic skin aging; photoaging; VISIA; skin immune regulation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81772071, 81971835, 81772072, 81201470, 81501663]
  2. Talent Support Program of Air Force Medical University Project Ling Yun

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although it is well-known that human skin aging is accompanied by an alteration in the skin microbiota, we know little about how the composition of these changes during the course of aging and the effects of age-related skin microbes on aging. Using 16S ribosomal DNA and internal transcribed spacer ribosomal DNA sequencing to profile the microbiomes of 160 skin samples from two anatomical sites, the cheek and the abdomen, on 80 individuals of varying ages, we developed age-related microbiota profiles for both intrinsic skin aging and photoaging to provide an improved understanding of the age-dependent variation in skin microbial composition. According to the landscape, the microbial composition in the Children group was significantly different from that in the other age groups. Further correlation analysis with clinical parameters and functional prediction in each group revealed that high enrichment of nine microbial communities (i.e., Cyanobacteria, Staphylococcus, Cutibacterium, Lactobacillus, Corynebacterium, Streptococcus, Neisseria, Candida, and Malassezia) and 18 pathways (such as biosynthesis of antibiotics) potentially affected skin aging, implying that skin microbiomes may perform key functions in skin aging by regulating the immune response, resistance to ultraviolet light, and biosynthesis and metabolism of age-related substances. Our work re-establishes that skin microbiomes play an important regulatory role in the aging process and opens a new approach for targeted microbial therapy for skin aging.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据