INTRODUCTION

Foodborne diseases remain one of the biggest threats to the food industry, and when outbreaks occur, they cause significant losses to a country, as a large portion of the national budget is spent on managing such disasters. To address this, the food industry has upgraded its safety systems to ensure consumer protection. This continuous improvement has also created healthy competition among food industries, driving technological advancements. Nature has blessed us with a wide variety of foods, and food lovers always expect these to be nutritious, wholesome, and safe for consumption. According to Obafemi et al. (2025), microbial spoilage is a major factor affecting food quality and safety. When microbes enter food products, they can cause discoloration, destroy flavour compounds, and lead to food toxicity. This not only damages public perception but may also contribute to food scarcity. Preservation is therefore essential to control spoilage-causing pathogens. Bacteriocins, the native antimicrobial peptides of bacteria, are becoming increasingly important tools in contemporary food protection. They inhibit pathogenic and spoilage bacteria quite effectively, providing a biological alternative to conventional preservatives (Le et al. 2016; Obafemi et al. 2025).

In the quest for safe, natural, and effective antimicrobial agents, bacteriocins have become a cornerstone of modern biotechnology. These ribosomally synthesized peptides, which are secreted by various strains of bacteria, have strong inhibitory action against other microorganisms, such as foodborne pathogens and spoilage bacteria. Their use includes antimicrobial function to preserve foods, promote animal health, and treat diseases (Ali et al. 2020). Food technologists and scientists have increasingly turned to biopreservatives, among which bacteriocins produced through biotechnology are of particular interest. Bacteriocins show promising antimicrobial effects against food spoilage organisms and are widely considered natural food biopreservatives (Mahindra et al. 2015). Bacteriocins play a vital role in overcoming food safety issues, lowering the dependence on chemical preservatives, and minimizing threats of foodborne illness. In the food sector, they provide a reliable solution for shelf-life extension and product safety. Outside of the food sector, they are investigated for their therapeutic applications, such as fighting antibiotic-resistant infections and influencing the gut microbiome (Gu 2023). This review highlights bacteriocins, their classifications, and their importance in the meat sector, plant growth, and skin care products.

BACTERIOCINS

The extensive use of conventional medicines in the treatment of human and animal diseases has become a concern in recent years (Roy 1997; Yoneyama and Katsumata 2006). The emergence of resistant strains has complicated the treatment of many diseases, making the development of new antimicrobial agents an important goal (Kumar and Schweiser 2005; Fisher et al. 2005). Bacteriocins have gained attention as alternatives to antibiotics because they are non-toxic, active at nanomolar concentrations, and produced naturally by lactic acid bacteria (Parada et al. 2007). They are proteinaceous compounds with antimicrobial activity, produced by bacteria to inhibit or kill other bacterial strains (Parada et al. 2007). Although they are bacterial products, they are not classified as antibiotics to avoid confusion with therapeutic drugs (Deraz et al. 2005). For the food industry, bacteriocin production is highly beneficial, as it helps inhibit and eliminate pathogens. Many bacteriocins are effective against closely related bacteria, often displaying a narrow host range (Deegan et al. 2006). It is used predominantly in canned foods and dairy products and is especially effective when utilized in the production of processed cheese and cheese spreads, where it protects against heat-resistant spore-forming organisms such as those belonging to the genera Bacillus and Clostridium (Tarelli et al. 1994).

CLASSES OF BACTERIOCINS

Bacteriocins are broadly divided into four main classes. Class I includes lantibiotics, which are small peptides of less than 5 kDa in size and are heat-stable. They act mainly by disrupting bacterial membranes, and nisin is the most well-known example (Broadbent et al. 1989). Within this class, subclass-Ia- Ia consists of positively charged, elongated, and flexible peptides, while subclass-Ib includes peptides that are more rigid, globular in shape, and either uncharged or negatively charged (Parada et al. 2007). Class II bacteriocins, often referred to as non-lantibiotics, are heat-stable peptides composed of amino acids and show variability in molecular weight. This class is further divided into three groups: Class-IIa, which contains peptides active against Listeria species and is represented by pediocin PA-1; Class-IIb, which includes bacteriocins that require two different peptides to achieve antimicrobial activity; and Class-IIc, which is characterized by small, heat-stable peptides transported by leader sequences (Venema et al. 1997; Holo et al. 2002; Mauriello et al. 1999; Parada et al. 2007). Class-III bacteriocins are larger in size, with molecular weights exceeding 30 kDa, while Class-IV bacteriocins are complex molecules containing carbohydrate or lipid moieties in addition to protein components (Parada et al. 2007; Holo et al. 2002; Mauriello et al. 1999).

EFFECT OF PURIFICATION METHODS, pH AND TEMPERATURE ON BACTERIOCIN PRODUCTION

Different purification methods have been developed depending on the class of bacteriocin (Table 1). These include protein precipitation, chromatography, and electrophoretic techniques, which allow isolation and characterization of bacteriocins for food and pharmaceutical applications. The production and activity of bacteriocins vary with environmental conditions. Studies have shown that each bacterial strain has an optimum pH range and temperature at which bacteriocin production is maximized (Table 2 and 3).

BENEFITS OF BACTERIOCINS

The application of bacteriocins in the food industry is valuable for extending shelf life and protecting against harmful pathogens. Their use reduces the risk of disease transmission and economic losses associated with food spoilage. Growing consumer demand for natural, minimally processed foods further supports the role of bacteriocins as natural antimicrobial agents (Soltani et al. 2021). When tested individually or in combination, bacteriocins show promising results against foodborne pathogens (Rendueles et al. 2022). In the dairy and poultry sectors, they have been applied successfully to control Clostridium spp. (Arqués et al. 2015; Le et al. 2016). However, bacteriocins that are applied commercially as biopreservatives must fulfill specific requirements (Holo et al. 2002; Mauriello et al. 1999), such as being non-toxic, accepted by recognized authorities, remaining sufficiently stable during storage, and not negatively affecting the quality of the product to which they are applied.

APPLICATIONS OF BACTERIOCINS

Metal industry

Several bacteriocins have been applied in the meat sector to control pathogens, thereby improving food safety and

Table 1: Purification of bacteriocins according to their classes

Class

Purification Method

Procedure

Result

Reference

Class I Bacteriocins

Expanded bed ion exchange chromatography

Through processing of the Lactococcus lactis subsp diluted culture broth of A164 obtained, and further, this broth was processed by using this method

31-fold purification was achieved with a yield of 90%

Cheigh et al. 2004

Ion exchange, Hydrophobic Interaction

20% of ammonium sulphate was used with the precipitate of the cell-free supernatant

Through the use of Lactobacillus sake L45, its strain Lactocin S, a 3,7 kDa bacteriocin, was created and then refined to uniformity

Mørtvedt et al. 1991

Combinations of different chromatographic methods

Hydrophobic and Cation exchange principles were applied during the use of these methods

Purification of Acidocin CH5 manufactured by using L. acidophilus in lab

Chumchalova et al. 2004

Class II Bacteriocins

Ethanol precipitation

In the first step, ampholytes, Tween 20, and glycine were mixed, followed by ultrafiltration to achieve a pure sample. Lastly, the sample was moved to tricine SDS-PAGE

Pediococcus acidilactici was used to produce purified pediocin PA-1, with a yield between 30 and 40%

Venema etal. 2004

Saturation with ammonium sulfate (35%)

In an FPLC system, purification includes Gel filtration chromatography, and then is moved to methanol-chloroform extraction, followed by three methods. Firstly by ion-exchange, then by hydrophobic interaction, and lastly through reverse-phase chromatography

Lactobin A, produced by L. amylovorus, was purified

Contreras et al. 1997

ion-exchange chromatography, ultrafiltration, and successive gel filtrations

One of these methods can be used in the presence of two experimental consituents, 8 M urea followed by sodium dodecyl sulfate 0,1% sodium dodecyl sulfate

Lactacin B produced from L. acidophilus was purified

Barefoot et al. 1984

Class III Bacteriocins

Ammonium sulfate precipitation

In sodium acetate buffer, the pellet was placed and then dialysed against sodium acetate buffer.

Lactobacillus helveticus 481 produced Helveticin J, a peptide was purified

Joerger and Klaenhammer 1986

Table 2: Effect of pH on bacteriocin

Bacteriocin producing strain

Optimum pH

Reference

Leuconostoc MF215B

pH 6.0

Blom et al. 1999

L. gelidin

pH 6.5

Stiles and Hasting 1991

amylovorin L471

pH 6.5

Callewaert et al. 1999)

C. piscicola

7.0

Herbin et al. 1997

Table 3: Effect of temperature on bacteriocin

Bacteriocin /Strain

Suitable Temperature for Bacteriocin Production

Observation

Reference

Strain D53

10°C to 37°C

--------

Uhlman et al. 1992

Brevibacterium linens

25°C

No growth found at 37°C

Diep et al. 2000

Diep et al. 2000

L. sake

25–30°C

At 33.5°C decline in production occurs, and zero production is observed at 34.5°C

L. plantarumY21

30°C

At 37°C, especially in milk products, bacteriocin was produced during incubation

Tarelli et al. 1994

extending shelf life. Classes of meat-preservation bacteriocins are present in Table 4. Partially purified or purified bacteriocins may be applied as a food additive and for active packaging. Moreover, bacteriocin-producing cells may be incorporated as starter or protective cultures for meat fermentation.

Veterinary use

Nisin has been investigated for the prevention of bovine mastitis caused by Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactiae. Injectable formulations containing nisin have shown up to 99.9% effectiveness in controlling these

Table 4: Role of different bacteriocins against different pathogens in meat sector

Type of meat

Meat product

Strains of bacteriocin

Action against pathogens

Other changes

References

Meat Salami

Ostrich meat salami

Lactobacillus curvatus DF126

Anti-Listeria activity

-----

Dicks et al. 2004

Salami from ostrich, beef, mutton

Lactobacillus plantarum 423

----

Dicks et al. 2004; Todorov et al. 2007

Lactobacillus curvatus DF38

----

Todorov et al. 2007

Fermented Meat

Fermented

pork sausage

Pediococcus pentosaceus BCC 3772

Anti-Listeria activity

No changes in sensory properties, as well as in

consumer acceptability of the product

Kingcha et al. 2012

Fermented pork sausage

Lactobacillus sakei C2

nti-Listeria and Anti-Enterobacteriacae

activity,

Both the ratio of malondialdehyde and

The nitrite content in the product was reduced

Gao et al. 2014

Raw Meat

Raw beef

Lactobacillus curvatus CWBI-B28

Anti-Listeria activity

--------

Dortu et al. 2008

Packed Meat

Vacuum-packed fresh

beef

Lactobacillus curvatus CRL705

Anti-Listeria activity

-------

Castellano et al. 2010; Castellano and Vignolo et al. 2006

pathogens. If these pathogens are not controlled, they cause significant economic losses in the livestock industry (Perez et al. 2014; Le et al. 2016).

Skincare

Scientific evidence suggests that certain probiotics help maintain the skin’s lipid barrier and microflora, supporting skin immunity and homeostasis (Munir et al. 2025). In one study, a lotion containing ESL5, a bacteriocin from Enterococcus faecalis SL-5, significantly reduced pimples and inflammatory acne lesions caused by Propionibacterium acnes (Kang et al. 2009), suggesting their potential role in skin care products.

Plant growth promotion

Bacteriocins such as thuricin 17, bacthuricin F4, and bacteriocin C85 have been shown to enhance plant growth. When applied with their producing bacteria on tomato, soybean, and corn, they improved leaf area, increased photosynthesis rates by up to 6%, and raised plant dry weight by 15%. Additionally, root nodulation increased by 21% compared to control plants (Smith et al. 2008).

CONCLUSIONS

In the 21^stcentury, the preparation of various food products requires knowledge and integration of multiple scientific fields, with the primary objective of ensuring food safety. Bacteriocins are associated with the control of harmful pathogens in the food and pharmaceutical industries, although further research is needed to fully understand their hidden roles in food safety. At present, consumers are paying greater attention to food safety, and to address their concerns, so industries are developing strong research-based models that ensure food safety. However, more research is needed to explore the use of bacteriocins in food and other industries.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Conceptualization and data collection were carried out by AW; manuscript drafting was performed by AbAR; review and editing were undertaken by MAQ. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors affirm that they possess no conflicts of interest.

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data will be made available on a fair request to the corresponding author

ETHICS APPROVAL

Not applicable to this paper

FUNDING SOURCE

This project is not funded by any agency.

REFERENCES

Ali A, Parisi A, Conversano MC, Iannacci A, D’Emilio F, Mercurio V, Normanno G (2020) Food-borne bacteria associated with seafoods: A brief review. Journal of Food Quality and Hazards Control 7: 4–10. https://doi.org/10.18502/jfqhc.7.1.2446.

Arqués JL, Rodríguez E, Langa S, Landete JM, Medina M (2015) Antimicrobial activity of lactic acid bacteria in dairy products and gut: Effect on pathogens. BioMed Research International 2015: 584183. https://10.1155/2015/584183.

Broadbent JR, Chou C, Guillies K, Kondo JK (1989) Nisin inhibits several gram-positive, mastitis-causing pathogens. Journal of Dairy Science 72: 3342–3345. https://10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(89)79496-0.

Barefoot SF, Klaenhammer TR (1984) Purification and characterization of the Lactobacillus acidophilus bacteriocin lactacin B. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 26: 328–334. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.26.3.328.

Blom H, Katla T, Holck A, Sletten K, Axelsson L, Holo H (1999) Characterization, production and purification of leucocin H, a two-peptide bacteriocin from Leuconostoc MF215B. Current Microbiology 39: 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/pl00006825.

Cheigh C, Kook M, Kim S, Hong Y, Pyun Y (2004). Simple one-step purification of nisin Z from unclarified culture broth of Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis A164 using expanded bed ion exchange chromatography. Biotechnology Letters 26: 1341–1345. https://10.1023/B:BILE.0000045630.29494.45.

Chumchalova J, Stiles J, Josephsen J, Plocková M (2004) Characterization and purification of acidocin CH5, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus acidophilus CH5. Applied Microbiology 96: 1082–1089. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2004.02237.x.

Contreras BGL, De Vuyst L, Devreese B, Busanyova K, Raymaeckers J, Bosman F, Sablon E, Vandamme EJ (1997) Isolation, purification, and amino acid sequence of lactobin A, one of the two bacteriocins produced by Lactobacillus amylovorus LMG P-13139. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 63: 13–20. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.63.1.13-20.1997.

Callewaert R, Holo H, Devresse B, Beeumen JV, Nes I, Vuyst LD (1999) Characterization and production of amylovorin L471, a bacteriocin purified from Lactobacillus amylovorus DCE 471 by a novel three-step method. Microbiology 145: 2559–2568. https://10.1099/00221287-145-9-2559.

Castellano P, Vignolo G (2006) Inhibition of Listeria innocua and Brochothrix thermosphacta in vacuum-packaged meat by addition of bacteriocinogenic Lactobacillus curvatus CRL705 and its bacteriocins. Letters in Applied Microbiology 43: 194–199. https://10.1111/j.1472-765X.2006.01933.x.

Castellano P, González C, Carduza F, Vignolo G (2010) Protective action of Lactobacillus curvatus CRL705 on vacuum-packaged raw beef: Effect on sensory and structural characteristics. Meat Science 85: 394–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2010.02.007.

Deraz SF, Karlsson EN, Hedstrom M, Andersson MM, Mattiasson B (2005) Purification and characterisation of acidocin D20079, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus acidophilus DSM 20079. Biotechnology 117: 343–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2005.02.005.

Deegan LH, Cotter PD, Hill C, Ross P (2006) Bacteriocins: Biological tools for biopreservation and shelf-life extension. International Dairy Journal 16: 1058–1071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.idairyj.2005.10.026.

Diep BD, Axelsson L, Grefsli C, Nes IF (2000) The synthesis of bacteriocin sakasin A is a temperature-sensitive process regulated by a pheromone peptide through a three-component regulatory system. Microbiology 146: 2155–2160. https://doi.org/10.1099/00221287-146-9-2155.

Dicks LMT, Mellett FD, Hoffman LC (2004) Use of bacteriocin-producing starter cultures of Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus curvatus in production of ostrich meat salami. Meat Science 66: 703–708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2003.07.002.

Dortu C, Huch M, Holzapfel WH, Franz CMAP, Thonart P (2008) Anti-listerial activity of bacteriocin-producing Lactobacillus curvatus CWBI-B28 and Lactobacillus sakei CWBI-B1365 on raw beef and poultry meat. Letters in Applied Microbiology 47: 581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1472-765X.2008.02468.x.

Fisher JF, Meroueh SO, Mobashery S (2005) Bacterial resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics: Compelling opportunism, compelling opportunity. Chemical Reviews 105: 395–424. https://doi.org/10.1021/cr030102i.

Gao Y, Li B, Liu X (2014) Bacteriocin-producing Lactobacillus sakei C2 as starter culture in fermented sausages. Food Control 35: 1–6. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11050736.

Gu Q (2023) Application of bacteriocins in the food industry. Bacteriocins 26: 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-2661-9_4.

Holo H, Fye T, Brede DA, Nilsen T, Odegard I, Langsrud T, Brendehaug J, Nes IF (2002) Bacteriocin of propionic acid bacteria. Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique 82: 59–68. https://doi.10.1051/lait : 2001005.

Herbin S, Mathien F, Brule F, Branlant C, Lefebvre G, Lebrihi A (1997) Characteristics and genetic determinants of bacteriocin activities produced by C. piscicola CP5 isolated from cheese. Current Microbiology 35: 319–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002849900262.

Joerger MC, Klaenhammer TR (1986) Characterization and purification of helveticin J and evidence for a chromosomally determined bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus helveticus 481. Journal of Bacteriology 167: 439–446. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.167.2.439-446.1986.

Kumar A, Schweiser HP (2005) Bacterial resistance to antibiotics: Active efflux and reduced uptake. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews 57: 1486–1513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2005.04.004.

Kingcha Y, Tosukhowong A, Zendo T, Roytrakul S, Luxananil P, Chareonpornsook K, Visessanguan W (2012) Anti-listeria activity of Pediococcus pentosaceus BCC 3772 and application as starter culture for Nham, a traditional fermented pork sausage. Food Control 25: 190–196.

Kang BS, Seo JG, Lee GS et al. (2009) Antimicrobial activity of enterocins from Enterococcus faecalis SL-5 against Propionibacterium acnes, the causative agent in acne vulgaris, and its therapeutic effect. The Journal of Microbiology 47: 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12275-008-0179-y.

Le LC, Dridi L, Bergeron MG, Ouellette M, Fliss I (2016) Nisin is an effective inhibitor of Clostridium difficile vegetative cells and spore germination. Journal of Medical Microbiology 65: 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.000202.

Mauriello G, Aponte M, Andolfi R, Moschetti G, Villani F (1999) Spray drying of bacteriocin-producing lactic acid bacteria. Food Protection 62: 773–777. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028x-62.7.773.

Mørtvedt CI, Nissen-Meyer J, Sletten K, Nes IF (1991) Purification and amino acid sequence of lactocin S, a bacteriocin produced by Lactobacillus sake L45. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 57: 1829–1834. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.57.6.1829-1834.1991.

Munir A, Janbey A, Sajjad B et al. (2025) Bioinformatics-driven discovery of skin microbiota bacteriocins as potential antibiotics and probiotics. Journal of Antibiotics 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41429-025-00847-2.

Obafemi YD, Obiukwu AC, Oranusi SU (2025) Revisiting the application, current trends, and prospect of bacteriocins in food preservation. Discover Food 5: 165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44187-025-00472-w.

Parada JL, Caron CR, Mediros ABP, Soccol CR (2007) Bacteriocin from lactic acid bacteria: Purification, properties and use as biopreservatives. Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology 50: 521–542. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-89132007000300018.

Perez RH, Zendo T, Sonomoto K (2014) Novel bacteriocins from lactic acid bacteria (LAB): Various structures and applications. Microbial Cell Factories 13: 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2859-13-s1-s3.

Roy PH (1997) Dissemination of antibiotic resistance. Medical Science 13: 927–933. https://doi.org/10.1086/321877.

Rendueles C, Duarte AC, Escobedo S, Fernández L, Rodríguez A, García P, Martínez B (2022) Combined use of bacteriocins and bacteriophages as food biopreservatives: A review. International Journal of Food Microbiology 368: 109611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2022.109611.

Stiles ME, Hasting JW (1991) Bacteriocin production by lactic acid bacteria: Potential for use in meat preservation. Trends in Food Science and Technology 2: 247–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/0924-2244(91)90706-O.

Soltani S, Hammami R, Cotter PD, Rebuffat S, Said LB, Gaudreau H, Bédard F, Biron E, Drider D, Fliss I (2021) Bacteriocins as a new generation of antimicrobials: Toxicity aspects and regulations. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 45: fuaa039. https://doi.org/10.1093/femsre/fuaa039.

Smith D, Lee KD, Gray E, Souleimanov A, Zhou X (2008) Use of bacteriocins for promoting plant growth and disease resistance. US Patent 20080248953.

Tarelli TG, Carminati D, Giraffa G (1994) Production of bacteriocin active against Listeria monocytogenes and Listeria innocua from dairy enterococci. Food Microbiology 11: 243–252. https://doi.10.1006/fmic.1994.1027.

Todorov SD, Koep KSC, Van Reenen CA, Hoffman LC, Slinde E, Dicks LMT (2007) Production of salami from beef, horse, mutton, blesbok (Damaliscus dorcas phillipsi) and springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis) with bacteriocinogenic strains of Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus curvatus. Meat Science 77: 405–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2007.04.007.

Uhlman L, Schrillinger U, Rupnew J, Holzapfel WH (1992) Identification and characterization of two bacteriocin-producing strains of Lactococcus lactis isolated from vegetables. International Journal of Food Microbiology 2: 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1605(92)90007-p.

Venema K, Chikindas ML, Seegers JFMI, Haandrikman AJ, Leenhouts KJ, Venema G, Kok J (1997) Rapid and efficient purification method for small, hydrophobic, cationic bacteriocins: Purification of lactococcin B and pediocin PA-1. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 63: 305–309. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.63.1.305-309.1997.

Yoneyama H, Katsumata R (2006) Antibiotic resistance in bacteria and its future for novel antibiotic development. Bioscience, Biotechnology and Biochemistry 70: 1060–1075. https://doi.org/10.1271/bbb.70.1060.