MARINE INGREDIENTS


Sulfated exopolysaccharides: rethinking hydration


Laia Sallan Trepat - Special Chemicals


Over the past decade, the cosmetics industry has faced increasing pressure to deliver ingredients that combine high performance and sustainability. Consumers now expect moisturizers and other bioactives to provide not only short-term sensory benefits but also measurable improvements in hydration, barrier function, skin resilience and protection against environmental stressors. At the same time, brands are being pushed


to move beyond well-established ingredients, such as hyaluronic acid (HA) and polysaccharides obtained through traditional fermentation,1,2,3


as


these categories have become saturated and offer limited multifunctionality. In addition, concerns regarding environmental dependency, agricultural inputs and traceability have intensified the search for more robust and sustainable alternatives. In this context, sulfated exopolysaccharides


(EPS) derived from microalgae have emerged as a compelling next-generation option. These biopolymers, naturally secreted by the red microalga Porphyridium cruentum, present a distinctive molecular architecture rich in sulfate groups and functional sugars that contributes to their hydrating, film-forming, antioxidant, anti- inflammatory and anti-ageing properties.4,5,6,7,8,10,11 Their production through closed


photobioreactors further enhances their appeal from a sustainability standpoint, as this biotechnological model avoids freshwater consumption, agricultural land use and the variability associated with wild harvesting.9 Compared with plant- or bacteria-derived polysaccharides, microalgal EPS offer a broader functional spectrum and a more controlled ecological footprint. Research efforts in this field have expanded


in recent years, including developments like the SCH AlgaeTech™ technology platform by Special Chemicals, which investigates the cosmetic potential of microalgae-based bioactives through a carbon-negative production process. This article examines the scientific and comparative performance of microalgal EPS, evaluating how they differ from established benchmarks such as hyaluronic acid, biosaccharide gum-1 and fucoidans from brown algae.


Microalgal EPS: origin and biotechnological background Sulfated EPS from Porphyridium cruentum are extracellular biopolymers naturally released by this unicellular red microalga.4


www.personalcaremagazine.com


production forms part of the organism’s protective strategy against environmental stress, resulting in a high-molecular-weight matrix enriched with sulfate groups and structurally diverse sugars. This intrinsic biological origin already differentiates microalgal EPS from plant- or fermentation- derived polysaccharides, which typically lack sulfation and present simpler linear structures. From a manufacturing standpoint, microalgal


EPS are cultivated in closed photobioreactors, a controlled system that ensures consistent biomass growth, stable physicochemical conditions, and full traceability of inputs.9


This contrasts with


bacterial fermentation, the most common method for producing hyaluronic acid,3


and certain


plant-based polysaccharides, which depends on nutrient-rich media derived from agricultural substrates or, in some cases, animal by-products. Similarly, fucoidans extracted from brown


Their continuous


algae rely on wild harvesting, a process affected by seasonality, environmental fluctuations and variable ecological impact.12 A key sustainability advantage of microalgal biotechnology is the ability to feed cultures using


CO2 sourced from industrial emissions, effectively


transforming a waste stream into a biological resource. This process reduces the carbon footprint of the ingredient while decoupling production from agricultural land, freshwater use and the ecological pressures associated with wild harvesting. As a result, photobioreactor-based EPS


represent a clean, reproducible, and low-impact biopolymer source, an important context for the comparisons presented in the next sections.


Comparative biochemistry and structure The functional differences between microalgal EPS and commonly used cosmetic polysaccharides arise primarily from their distinct biochemical architectures. EPS from Porphyridium cruentum exhibit a highly complex, three-dimensional structure composed of heterogeneous sugars (including xylose, fucose, glucuronic acid and galactose), reducing ends and a significant degree of sulfation.4


This sulfation introduces negative charges that enhance bioactivity, enabling February 2026 PERSONAL CARE MAGAZINE


31


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72