Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Challenges and potential solutions for nanosensors intended for use with foods

Nature Nanotechnology volume 16, pages 251–265 (2021)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Nanotechnology-adapted detection technologies could improve the safety and quality of foods, provide new methods to combat fraud and be useful tools in our arsenal against bioterrorism. Yet despite hundreds of published studies on nanosensors each year targeted to the food and agriculture space, there are few nanosensors on the market in this area and almost no nanotechnology-enabled methods employed by public health agencies for food analysis. This Review shows that the field is currently being held back by technical, regulatory, political, legal, economic, environmental health and safety, and ethical challenges. We explore these challenges in detail and provide suggestions about how they may be surmounted. Strategies that may have particular effectiveness include improving funding opportunities and publication venues for nanosensor validation, social science and patent landscape studies; prioritizing research and development of nanosensors that are specifically designed for rapid analysis in non-laboratory settings; and incorporating platform cost and adaptability into early design decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Summary of the peer-reviewed publication landscape over the 2007–2020 period for nanosensors that focus on foods.
Fig. 2: Survey of recent nanosensor patents using the Google Patents search engine.
Fig. 3: The EC’s TRL system.
Fig. 4: Categorization scheme.
Fig. 5: Classes of nanosensors.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Food safety. World Health Organization https://www.who.int/health-topics/food-safety/ (2020).

  2. Devleesschauwer, B., Haagsma, J. A., Mangen, M.-J. J., Lake, R. J. & Havelaar, A. H. in Food Safety Economics, Food Microbiology and Food Safety (ed. Roberts, T.) 107–122 (Springer, 2018).

  3. Fritsche, J. Recent developments and digital perspectives in food safety and authenticity. J. Agric. Food Chem. 66, 7562–7567 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Zhang, L., Peng, D., Liang, R.-P. & Qiu, J.-D. Graphene-based optical nanosensors for detection of heavy metal ions. Trends Anal. Chem. 102, 280–289 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Wang, D. et al. Functionalized copper nanoclusters-based fluorescent probe with aggregation-induced emission property for selective detection of sulfide ions in food additives. J. Agric. Food Chem. 68, 11301–11308 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Tang, N. et al. A fully integrated wireless flexible ammonia sensor fabricated by soft nano-lithography. ACS Sens. 4, 726–732 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Xiao, X. et al. Rational engineering of chromic material as near-infrared ratiometric fluorescent nanosensor for H2S monitoring in real food samples. Sens. Actuators B 323, 128707 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Yang, T. et al. Real-time monitoring of pesticide translocation in tomato plants by surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy. Anal. Chem. 91, 2093–2099 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wu, Y. et al. Engineered gold nanoparticles as multicolor labels for simultaneous multi-mycotoxin detection on the immunochromatographic test strip nanosensor. Sens. Actuators B 316, 128107 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang, Y., Schill, K. M., Fry, H. C. & Duncan, T. V. A quantum dot nanobiosensor for rapid detection of botulinum neurotoxin serotype E. ACS Sens. 5, 2118–2127 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Xiong, Y., Zhang, D., Hao, Y., Liu, Y. & Si, M. Label-free detection of wild mushrooms DNA based on surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy. J. Raman Spectrosc. 51, 46–54 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rippa, M. et al. Octupolar plasmonic nanosensor based on ordered arrays of triangular Au nanopillars for selective rotavirus detection. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 3, 4837–4844 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kearns, H., Goodacre, R., Jamieson, L. E., Graham, D. & Faulds, K. SERS detection of multiple antimicrobial-resistant pathogens using nanosensors. Anal. Chem. 89, 12666–12673 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jimenez-Falcao, S. et al. Enzyme-controlled mesoporous nanosensor for the detection of living Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Sens. Actuators B 303, 127197 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ehgartner, J. et al. Simultaneous determination of oxygen and pH inside microfluidic devices using core–shell nanosensors. Anal. Chem. 88, 9796–9804 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gupta, S. P., Pawbake, A. S., Sathe, B. R., Late, D. J. & Walke, P. S. Superior humidity sensor and photodetector of mesoporous ZnO nanosheets at room temperature. Sens. Actuators B 293, 83–92 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Borisov, S. M., Mayr, T. & Klimant, I. Poly(styrene-block-vinylpyrrolidone) beads as a versatile material for simple fabrication of optical nanosensors. Anal. Chem. 80, 573–582 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nanotechnologies—Vocabulary—Part 1: Core Terms ISO/TS 80004-1:2015(en) (ISO, 2015).

  19. Wang, Y. & Duncan, T. V. Nanoscale sensors for assuring the safety of food products. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 44, 74–86 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Duncan, T. V. Applications of nanotechnology in food packaging and food safety: barrier materials, antimicrobials and sensors. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 363, 1–24 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Caon, T., Martelli, S. M. & Fakhouri, F. M. in Nanobiosensors (ed. Grumezescu, A. M.) 773–804 (Academic Press, 2017).

  22. Srivastava, A. K., Dev, A. & Karmakar, S. Nanosensors and nanobiosensors in food and agriculture. Environ. Chem. Lett. 16, 161–182 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Vikesland, P. J. Nanosensors for water quality monitoring. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 651–660 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Giraldo, J. P., Wu, H., Newkirk, G. M. & Kruss, S. Nanobiotechnology approaches for engineering smart plant sensors. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 541–553 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Schebesta, H. & Candel, J. J. L. Game-changing potential of the EU’s Farm to Fork Strategy. Nat. Food 1, 586–588 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Langer, J. et al. Present and future of surface-enhanced Raman scattering. ACS Nano 14, 28–117 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Fuertes, G. et al. Intelligent packaging systems: sensors and nanosensors to monitor food quality and safety. J. Sens. 2016, 4046061 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kempahanumakkagari, S., Deep, A., Kim, K.-H., Kumar Kailasa, S. & Yoon, H.-O. Nanomaterial-based electrochemical sensors for arsenic—a review. Biosens. Bioelectron. 95, 106–116 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Weng, X., Chen, L., Neethirajan, S. & Duffield, T. Development of quantum dots-based biosensor towards on-farm detection of subclinical ketosis. Biosens. Bioelectron. 72, 140–147 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Weerathunge, P. et al. Ultrasensitive colorimetric detection of murine norovirus using NanoZyme aptasensor. Anal. Chem. 91, 3270–3276 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Yang, T. et al. Mapping of pesticide transmission on biological tissues by surface enhanced Raman microscopy with a gold nanoparticle mirror. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11, 44894–44904 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hayter, C. S., Rasmussen, E. & Rooksby, J. H. Beyond formal university technology transfer: innovative pathways for knowledge exchange. J. Technol. Transf. 45, 1–8 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Norman, G. A. & Eisenkot, R. Technology transfer: from the research bench to commercialization: part 2: the commercialization process. JACC Basic Transl. Sci. 2, 197–208 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. What is the process of technology transfer? Centers of Disease Control and Prevention https://www.cdc.gov/os/technology/techtransfer/technology-transfer-process.htm (2021).

  35. Héder, M. From NASA to EU: the evolution of the TRL scale in public sector innovation. Innov. J. 22, 3 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions— Preparing for Our Future: Developing A Common Strategy for Key Enabling Technologies in the EU (Commission of the European Communities, 2009).

  37. Milana, S. The lab-to-fab journey of 2D materials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 919–921 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Paliwal, R., Babu, R. J. & Palakurthi, S. Nanomedicine scale-up technologies: feasibilities and challenges. AAPS PharmSciTech 15, 1527–1534 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Fadel, T. R. et al. Toward the responsible development and commercialization of sensor nanotechnologies. ACS Sens. 1, 207–216 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Stavis, S. M., Fagan, J. A., Stopa, M. & Liddle, J. A. Nanoparticle manufacturing—heterogeneity through processes to products. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 1, 4358–4385 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Peng, H.-I., Krauss, T. D. & Miller, B. L. Aging induced Ag nanoparticle rearrangement under ambient atmosphere and consequences for nanoparticle-enhanced DNA biosensing. Anal. Chem. 82, 8664–8670 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Shi, Y., Ji, Y., Hui, F. & Lanza, M. On the ageing mechanisms of graphene-on-metal electrodes. In Proc. 10th Spanish Conference on Electron Devices (CDE) (Eds. Álvarez, Á. L. & Coya, C.) 1–4 (IEEE, 2015).

  43. Ahn, J. J., Kim, Y., Corley, E. A. & Scheufele, D. A. Laboratory safety and nanotechnology workers: an analysis of current guidelines in the USA. NanoEthics 10, 5–23 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lanza, G. A., Perez-Taborda, J. A. & Avila, A. Time temperature indicators (TTIs) based on silver nanoparticles for monitoring of perishables products. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1247, 012055 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Duncan, T. V. & Pillai, K. Release of engineered nanomaterials from polymer nanocomposites: diffusion, dissolution, and desorption. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 7, 2–19 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Guidance for Industry: Preparation of Premarket Submissions for Food Contact Substances: Chemistry Recommendations (US FDA, 2007); http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/IngredientsAdditivesGRASPackaging/ucm081818.htm

  47. Werner, B. G., Koontz, J. L. & Goddard, J. M. Hurdles to commercial translation of next generation active food packaging technologies. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 16, 40–48 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Mitter, N. & Hussey, K. Moving policy and regulation forward for nanotechnology applications in agriculture. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 508–510 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Horwitz, W. Evaluation of analytical methods used for regulation of foods and drugs. Anal. Chem. 54, 67–76 (1982).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Guidelines for the Validation of Chemical Methods in Food, Feed, Cosmetics, and Veterinary Products 3rd edn (US FDA, 2019).

  51. Guidelines for the Validation of Analytical Methods for the Detection of Microbial Pathogens in Foods and Feeds 3rd edn (US FDA, 2019).

  52. Appendix K: Guidelines for Dietary Supplements and Botanicals, Part 1 AOAC Guidelines for Single-Laboratory Validation of Chemical Methods for Dietary Supplements and Botanicals (AOAC International, 2013).

  53. UN FAO Codex Alimentarius Commission Procedural Manual 21st edn (Secretariat of the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, 2014).

  54. Taverniers, I., De Loose, M. & Van Bockstaele, E. Trends in quality in the analytical laboratory. I. Traceability and measurement uncertainty of analytical results. Trends Anal. Chem. 23, 480–490 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Faucher, S., Le Coustumer, P. & Lespes, G. Nanoanalytics: history, concepts, and specificities. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 26, 5267–5281 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Taverniers, I., De Loose, M. & Van Bockstaele, E. Trends in quality in the analytical laboratory. II. Analytical method validation and quality assurance. Trends Anal. Chem. 23, 535–552 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Horwitz, W. Problems of sampling and analytical methods. J. AOAC 59, 1197–1203 (1976).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Tsai-hsuan, Ku. S. Forming interdisciplinary expertise: one organization’s journey on the road to translational nanomedicine. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 4, 366–377 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Faigman, D. L., Slobogin, C. & Monahan, J. Gatekeeping science: using the structure of scientific research to distinguish between admissibility and weight in expert testimony. Northwest. Univ. Law Rev. 110, 859–904 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Faigman, D. L. Is science different for lawyers? Science 297, 339–340 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Rodricks, J. V. in Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence 3rd edn (ed. Council, N. R.) 503–548 (National Academies Press, 2011).

  62. Murphy, M. J. in Veterinary Toxicology 3rd edn (ed Gupta, R. C.) 173–194 (Academic Press, 2018).

  63. Report to the President—Forensic Science in Criminal Courts: Ensuring Scientific Validity of Feature-Comparison Methods (Executive Office of the President of the United States, President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology, 2016).

  64. Muehlethaler, C., Leona, M. & Lombardi, J. R. Towards a validation of surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) for use in forensic science: repeatability and reproducibility experiments. Forensic Sci. Int. 268, 1–13 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Popa, C., Holvoet, K., Van Montfort, T., Groeneveld, F. & Simoens, S. Risk–return analysis of the biopharmaceutical industry as compared to other industries. Front. Pharmacol. 9, 1108 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Ledley, F. D., McCoy, S. S., Vaughan, G. & Cleary, E. G. Profitability of large pharmaceutical companies compared with other large public companies. JAMA 323, 834–843 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Han, J.-W., Ruiz-Garcia, L., Qian, J.-P. & Yang, X.-T. Food packaging: a comprehensive review and future trends. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 17, 860–877 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Chowdhury, P., Gogoi, M., Borchetia, S. & Bandyopadhyay, T. Nanotechnology applications and intellectual property rights in agriculture. Environ. Chem. Lett. 15, 413–419 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Morris, E. M. The irrelevance of nanotechnology patents. Conn. Law Rev. 49, 499–552 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Zingg, R. & Fischer, M. The nanotechnology patent thicket revisited. J. Nanopart. Res. 20, 267 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Rothaermel, F. T. & Thursby, M. The nanotech versus the biotech revolution: sources of productivity in incumbent firm research. Res. Policy 36, 832–849 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Atalla, K. et al. in Wireless Computing in Medicine (ed Eshaghian‐Wilner, M. M.) 567–600 (Wiley, 2016).

  73. Genet, C., Errabi, K. & Gauthier, C. Which model of technology transfer for nanotechnology? A comparison with biotech and microelectronics. Technovation 32, 205–215 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Wu, L., Zhu, H., Chen, H. & Roco, M. C. Comparing nanotechnology landscapes in the US and China: a patent analysis perspective. J. Nanopart. Res. 21, 180 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Weiss, K. D. & Almeda, L. G. Competitive intelligence—understanding current trends in the patent landscape for nanomaterials. In Proc. 17th IEEE 17th International Conference on Nanotechnology (IEEE-NANO) 1003–1009 (IEEE, 2017).

  76. Tahmooresnejad, L. & Beaudry, C. Collaboration or funding: lessons from a study of nanotechnology patenting in Canada and the United States. J. Technol. Transf. 44, 741–777 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Rausand, M. & Utne, I. B. Product safety—principles and practices in a life cycle perspective. Saf. Sci. 47, 939–947 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Duncan, T. V. & Singh, G. in: Nanotechnology in Foods 2nd edn (eds Chaudhry, Q. et al.) Ch. 8 (Royal Society of Chemistry, 2017).

  79. Zhang, M. et al. Detection of engineered nanoparticles in aquatic environments: current status and challenges in enrichment, separation, and analysis. Environ. Sci. Nano 6, 709–735 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Fadeel, B. et al. Advanced tools for the safety assessment of nanomaterials. Nat. Nanotechnol. 13, 537–543 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Weiner, R. G., Sharma, A., Xu, H., Gray, P. J. & Duncan, T. V. Assessment of mass transfer from poly(ethylene) nanocomposites containing noble-metal nanoparticles: a systematic study of embedded particle stability. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 1, 5188–5196 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Gray, P. J. et al. Influence of different acids on the transport of CdSe quantum dots from polymer nanocomposites to food simulants. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 9468–9477 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Bott, J. & Franz, R. Investigations into the potential abrasive release of nanomaterials due to material stress conditions—part A: carbon black nano-particulates in plastic and rubber composites. Appl. Sci. 9, 214 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Addo Ntim, S. et al. Effects of consumer use practices on nanosilver release from commercially available food contact materials. Food Addit. Contam. A 35, 2279–2290 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Liu, C., Leng, W. & Vikesland, P. J. Controlled evaluation of the impacts of surface coatings on silver nanoparticle dissolution rates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 2726–2734 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Molleman, B. & Hiemstra, T. Time, pH, and size dependency of silver nanoparticle dissolution: the road to equilibrium. Environ. Sci. Nano 4, 1314–1327 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Garg, S., Rong, H., Miller, C. J. & Waite, T. D. Oxidative dissolution of silver nanoparticles by chlorine: implications to silver nanoparticle fate and toxicity. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 3890–3896 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Babik, K. R., Dahm, M. M., Dunn, K. H., Dunn, K. L. & Schubauer-Berigan, M. K. Characterizing workforces exposed to current and emerging non-carbonaceous nanomaterials in the U.S. J. Occup. Environ. Hygiene 15, 44–56 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Iavicoli, I., Leso, V., Beezhold, D. H. & Shvedova, A. A. Nanotechnology in agriculture: opportunities, toxicological implications, and occupational risks. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 329, 96–111 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Salieri, B., Turner, D. A., Nowack, B. & Hischier, R. Life cycle assessment of manufactured nanomaterials: Where are we? NanoImpact 10, 108–120 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Bandodkar, A. J., Jeerapan, I. & Wang, J. Wearable chemical sensors: present challenges and future prospects. ACS Sens. 1, 464–482 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Upadhyayula, V. K. K., Gadhamshetty, V., Shanmugam, K., Souihi, N. & Tysklind, M. Advancing game changing academic research concepts to commercialization: a life cycle assessment (LCA) based sustainability framework for making informed decisions in technology valley of death (TVD). Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 133, 404–416 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Buckley, J. A., Thompson, P. B. & Whyte, K. P. Collingridge’s dilemma and the early ethical assessment of emerging technology: the case of nanotechnology enabled biosensors. Technol. Soc. 48, 54–63 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Li, Z. et al. Non-invasive plant disease diagnostics enabled by smartphone-based fingerprinting of leaf volatiles. Nat. Plants 5, 856–866 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Ye, Y. et al. Portable smartphone-based QDs for the visual onsite monitoring of fluoroquinolone antibiotics in actual food and environmental samples. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 12, 14552–14562 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Su, D. et al. Smartphone-assisted robust sensing platform for on-site quantitation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid using red emissive carbon dots. Anal. Chem. 92, 12716–12724 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Li, Z. et al. Agricultural nanodiagnostics for plant diseases: recent advances and challenges. Nanoscale Adv. 2, 3083–3094 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Yigezu, Y. A. et al. Enhancing adoption of agricultural technologies requiring high initial investment among smallholders. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 134, 199–206 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Balehegn, M. et al. Improving adoption of technologies and interventions for increasing supply of quality livestock feed in low- and middle-income countries. Glob. Food Sec. 26, 100372 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Genus, A. & Stirling, A. Collingridge and the dilemma of control: towards responsible and accountable innovation. Res. Policy 47, 61–69 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Duncan, T. V. The communication challenges presented by nanofoods. Nat. Nanotechnol. 6, 683–688 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Bartolucci, C. et al. Green nanomaterials fostering agrifood sustainability. Trends Anal. Chem. 125, 115840 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Boholm, Å. & Larsson, S. What is the problem? A literature review on challenges facing the communication of nanotechnology to the public. J. Nanopart. Res. 21, 86 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Jacobsen, L. F. et al. Improving internal communication between marketing and technology functions for successful new food product development. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 37, 106–114 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Siegrist, M. Factors influencing public acceptance of innovative food technologies and products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 19, 603–608 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Klerkx, L. & Rose, D. Dealing with the game-changing technologies of Agriculture 4.0: How do we manage diversity and responsibility in food system transition pathways? Glob. Food Sec. 24, 100347 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Zang, F. et al. Ultrasensitive ebola virus antigen sensing via 3D nanoantenna arrays. Adv. Mater. 31, 1902331 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Kurdekar, A. D. et al. Streptavidin-conjugated gold nanoclusters as ultrasensitive fluorescent sensors for early diagnosis of HIV infection. Sci. Adv. 4, eaar6280 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Agrawal, A., Majdi, J., Clouse, K. A. & Stantchev, T. Electron-beam-lithographed nanostructures as reference materials for label-free scattered-light biosensing of single filoviruses. Sensors 18, 1670 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  110. Wang, Y., Fry, H. C., Skinner, G. E., Schill, K. M. & Duncan, T. V. Detection and quantification of biologically active botulinum neurotoxin serotypes A and B using a forster resonance energy transfer-based quantum dot nanobiosensor. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 9, 31446–31457 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. New Era of Smarter Food Safety: FDA’s Blueprint for the Future (US FDA, 2020).

  112. Lynn, G. S. & Akgün, A. E. Innovation strategies under uncertainty: a contingency approach for new product development. Eng. Manage. J. 10, 11–18 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Any findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the US Food and Drug Administration.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, United States Food and Drug Administration, Bedford Park, IL, USA

    Tianxi Yang & Timothy V. Duncan

Authors
  1. Tianxi Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Timothy V. Duncan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy V. Duncan.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Peer review information Nature Nanotechnology thanks Melanie Kah and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, T., Duncan, T.V. Challenges and potential solutions for nanosensors intended for use with foods. Nat. Nanotechnol. 16, 251–265 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00867-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00867-7

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing