Electrochemical biosensors for food spoilage, quality monitoring, and food safety: recent advances, sensor performance, and smart packaging integration

Abstract

Ensuring food safety and preventing spoilage are major challenges in today’s globalized food supply chain. Conventional detection methods, such as microbial culture, dye reduction tests, and sensory evaluation, are often slow, labour-intensive, and unsuitable for rapid on-site applications. This highlights the urgent need for real-time, accurate, and user-friendly technologies to monitor food quality and protect consumer health. Electrochemical biosensors have emerged as next-generation tools for detecting food spoilage and monitoring food safety. These devices combine biological recognition elements with electrochemical transducers to convert biochemical interactions into measurable electrical signals. This review summarizes recent advances (2023–2025) in electrochemical biosensing systems tailored for food applications. Various sensor types, detection mechanisms, and their performance in identifying spoilage indicators, pathogens, toxins, and chemical contaminants across different food matrices are systematically discussed. Specific spoilage and safety-related analytes, including L-lactic acid in milk and wine, histamine and putrescine in fish, volatile organic compounds such as hexanal and 1-octen-3-ol, deoxynivalenol in cereal products, pathogenic bacteria such as Salmonella and Staphylococcus aureus, pesticide residues, antibiotic residues, and heavy metals, are discussed across meat, seafood, dairy, fruit, vegetable, grain, and beverage matrices. Reported sensor performances demonstrate high sensitivity, with examples including L-lactic acid detection at 1 μM, histamine detection around 0.97 mg/L, VOC detection at 0.1 μM, and deoxynivalenol detection down to 0.24 mg/L. Innovations such as nanomaterial-modified electrodes, flexible and microfluidic platforms, and integration into intelligent packaging are highlighted as key contributors to enhanced sensitivity, portability, and real-time data analytics. Electrochemical biosensors show strong potential to reduce food waste by enabling early spoilage detection and timely intervention. While challenges in cost, long-term stability, regulatory validation, and industrial standardization remain, continued technological development and interdisciplinary collaboration will drive their adoption in sustainable and digitalized Food Safety 4.0 systems.

1 Introduction

As the global food chain becomes increasingly interconnected, food safety and quality assurance have become critical challenges. Foodborne illnesses can range from mild discomfort to life-threatening conditions and frequently arise from contamination or spoilage (Mohammad et al., 2018). In addition to health risks, spoilage causes major economic losses for producers, processors, retailers, and consumers. Reliable methods for evaluating freshness and detecting contamination are therefore essential. Conventional approaches, including sensory evaluation, microbial culture, and chemical assays, remain useful but are often slow, destructive, labour-intensive, and dependent on skilled personnel and laboratory infrastructure (Foddai and Grant, 2020; Kabiraz et al., 2023). These limitations are especially problematic during early spoilage, when biochemical changes may begin before visible, odour-based, or textural defects become obvious. Consequently, rapid and field-deployable biosensor-based technologies are increasingly required for real-time food quality monitoring (Pandhi et al., 2025).

Biosensors have emerged as an innovative tool for detecting food spoilage by combining biological recognition with signal transduction (Inês and Cosme, 2025). These devices integrate biological elements, such as enzymes, antibodies, or nucleic acids, with transducers that convert interactions into measurable signals. This approach enables early identification of spoilage indicators, often before visible changes occur. Biosensors offer multiple benefits over conventional approaches, such as real-time monitoring, rapid detection, and improved accuracy and precision, thereby reducing errors (Scott et al., 2024). Their small size, portability and flexibility make them ideal for on-site investigation throughout the food supply chain. This approach provides rapid protection against deterioration, ensuring safer and more efficient food delivery. Biosensors are poised to revolutionize food safety monitoring with accurate, fast, and portable solutions.

Electrochemical biosensors have attracted considerable attention among biosensors due to their distinct advantages (Cesewski and Johnson, 2020). Electrochemical biosensors have several significant benefits. Their heightened sensitivity results from the inherent amplification of the electrochemical signal, facilitating the detection of even small amounts of spoilage indicators. They are relatively inexpensive and easy to make, making them suitable for large-scale production and widespread distribution (Wu J. et al., 2023; Wu K. et al., 2023). Furthermore, electrochemical biosensors can detect a wide range of analytes, including microbial metabolites, volatile organic compounds, and other spoilage-related chemical signals, making them flexible devices for food quality assessment.

Electrochemical biosensors are particularly relevant for food safety because they can detect biological toxins, chemical residues, pathogens, and spoilage metabolites throughout the supply chain. Their ability to generate real-time electrical signals supports rapid risk identification, reduces unnecessary product holding, and helps prevent the distribution of unsafe or deteriorated foods. This review covers the fundamentals of electrochemical biosensors, their biorecognition elements, transduction modes, spoilage biomarkers, and applications in meat, seafood, dairy, fruits, vegetables, cereals, and beverages. It also evaluates recent developments in nanomaterial-enhanced electrodes, microfluidic formats, smart packaging, IoT connectivity, AI-assisted data interpretation, and industrial translation. Thus, the review is positioned not only as a descriptive summary of recent studies, but also as a critical comparison of analytical performance, validation status, and commercial readiness.

Novelty and scope of this review: Unlike earlier reviews that mainly discuss electrochemical sensor principles or individual food-safety applications, the present review integrates three dimensions: (i) comparative analytical performance of major electrochemical biosensor types, (ii) food-matrix-specific applicability for spoilage and quality monitoring, and (iii) translation barriers related to smart packaging, industrial scale-up, and regulation. The 2019–2025 window was used for bibliometric mapping to capture the evolution of the field, whereas the critical narrative synthesis emphasizes 2023–2025 because this period shows a strong shift toward nanomaterial-assisted platforms, flexible and disposable electrodes, microfluidic devices, AI/IoT-enabled readout, and intelligent packaging systems. This distinction clarifies the scope of the review and explains why recent studies are emphasized while earlier studies are retained for methodological context and trend analysis.

2 Literature search strategy

A bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Web of Science advanced search database to assess global research trends on the use of electrochemical biosensors for food spoilage and quality. The search began with formulating the query. The investigated topic focuses on the implementation of electrochemical biosensing techniques for food quality control within the food sector. To systematically retrieve relevant literature, the search query was structured using multiple thematic components. The primary topic included “electrochemical biosensors” OR “electrochemical sensors.” This was combined with application-specific terms such as “food spoilage,” “food quality,” “food freshness,” and “food safety.” Additionally, monitoring aspects were incorporated using terms like “real-time monitoring” OR “quality monitoring.” The search was further refined by limiting document types to “Article,” “Book Chapter,” “Book,” “Review,” “Database Review,” and “Script.” To enhance specificity, keyword-based filters were applied, including “biosensors in food” and “pathogen detection,” along with “food quality monitoring.” Together, these elements formed a comprehensive and structured query to capture relevant studies in the domain. Subsequently, filters were applied to the query results (111,794) to select only those materials categorized as books, book chapters, reviews, articles, and proceedings (62,659), published in English (45,761). The additional filter applied pertained to publication years 2019–2025 (21,932). For bibliometric visualization, metadata were exported in .txt format and analysed in VOSviewer. Author keywords, titles, abstracts, citations, and Keyword Plus terms were examined to identify dominant themes and their temporal evolution. A minimum keyword occurrence threshold of 10 was applied to construct the keyword co-occurrence network and overlay maps shown in Figures 1, 2. This workflow separates the purpose of the 2019–2025 bibliometric map from the 2023–2025 critical review focus, thereby resolving the apparent mismatch between the search period and the recent-advance emphasis of the manuscript. Figure 1 is not only a frequency map; it shows how the field is organized around linked clusters of electrochemical sensors, food safety, food quality, food freshness and foodborne pathogens. Larger nodes indicate themes with higher occurrence, whereas thicker links indicate stronger conceptual coupling. Figure 2 adds a temporal layer to this structure. Earlier work is concentrated around fundamental sensor design and electrochemical detection principles, while recent yellow-green nodes indicate a movement toward real-time food monitoring, smart packaging, rapid pathogen detection and practical spoilage-warning systems. Thus, the bibliometric results justify the review focus on translation-oriented advances rather than sensor design alone.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Inclusion criteria were articles, reviews, proceedings papers, book chapters, books, and database reviews; studies directly related to electrochemical or biosensor-based food spoilage, freshness, quality, pathogen, toxin, contaminant, or real-time monitoring applications; and studies reporting at least one relevant performance parameter such as limit of detection, linear range, sensitivity, response time, selectivity, or food-matrix validation. Exclusion criteria were non-food applications, purely clinical or environmental sensors without food relevance, studies not involving electrochemical or biosensor transduction, duplicate records, records without accessible abstracts, and papers lacking sufficient methodological or performance details. Screening followed a PRISMA-style workflow consisting of identification, duplicate removal, title/abstract screening, eligibility assessment through full-text reading, and final inclusion for narrative synthesis.

For bibliometric visualization, metadata were exported in .txt format and analysed in VOSviewer. Author keywords, titles, abstracts, citations, and Keyword Plus terms were examined to identify dominant themes and their temporal evolution. A minimum keyword occurrence threshold of 10 was applied to construct the keyword co-occurrence network and overlay maps shown in Figures 1, 2. This workflow separates the purpose of the 2019–2025 bibliometric map from the 2023–2025 critical review focus, thereby resolving the apparent mismatch between the search period and the recent-advance emphasis of the manuscript.

This investigation uses the VOSviewer to discern the principle research themes in electrochemical biosensors for food quality and spoilage detection. The study identified multiple significant clusters, each denoting a unique research theme. A notable cluster (red) pertains to electrochemical sensors and biosensors, linked to adjacent themes including food safety (beige), food quality (green), and food freshness (blue). Larger nodes were observed for keywords associated with food spoilage caused by food-borne pathogens, indicating a higher frequency of occurrence. The dimensions of a node indicate the significance of a keyword in the literature, whereas more robust connections reflect higher co-occurrence with other terms, such as sensors or biosensors. The overlay display in the VOS viewer illustrates the temporal progression of research topics, with node colors indicating the average publication year of each keyword. In the present study, nodes go from purple (earlier studies) to green (middle years) to yellow (latest studies).

The overlay map of electrochemical biosensors for food quality and spoilage detection shows that prior research (purple nodes) focused on fundamental sensor design and electrochemical detection mechanisms. In contrast, studies from the intermediate years (green nodes) prioritized food safety applications and analytical performance. Recent research (yellow nodes) emphasizes practical applications such as real-time monitoring, smart packaging integration, and swift identification of food spoilage pathogens. This gradient effectively demonstrates the progression of the field from fundamental sensor research to the implementation of food quality monitoring and safety systems.

3 Fundamentals of electrochemical biosensors

3.1 Principles of electrochemical biosensing

Electrochemical biosensors are analytical devices that couple biological recognition mechanisms with electrochemical transduction platforms to provide specific, quantifiable information about target analytes. Unlike conventional analytical assays, which often require extensive sample preparation and sophisticated instrumentation, these biosensors exploit the intrinsic selectivity of biorecognition elements—such as enzymes, antibodies, aptamers, nucleic acids, or even entire cells—and translate the recognition event into an electrical signal measurable as current, potential, charge, or impedance (Chen et al., 2025; Kim et al., 2022; Ozbey et al., 2025). The working principle hinges on redox processes or interfacial charge transfer events at the electrode–electrolyte interface. When the analyte interacts with the immobilized bioreceptor, it induces a measurable change in the electrochemical properties of the system. This change may involve direct oxidation–reduction of analytes (as in amperometric sensors), shifts in ionic gradients (potentiometric sensors), variation in current–potential profiles (voltammetric sensors), or alterations in electrode impedance (impedimetric sensors) (Wu et al., 2021).

Over the last 5 years, miniaturization, nanofabrication, and artificial intelligence (AI) have significantly advanced the field of biosensors. Modern electrochemical biosensors now exhibit detection limits in the pico- to nanomolar range, outperforming many traditional chromatographic or spectroscopic methods (Chen S. et al., 2023; Ojeda et al., 2024). Furthermore, their compatibility with portable, wearable, and paper-based formats positions them as indispensable tools for food safety diagnostics, environmental monitoring, and personalized healthcare (Ojeda et al., 2024; Shen et al., 2022).

3.2 Components of biosensors

A robust electrochemical biosensor integrates four essential modules: biorecognition elements, transducers, signal amplification and processing systems, and data interpretation platforms. Each module plays a distinct yet interconnected role in ensuring sensitivity, selectivity, reproducibility and usability. Figures 3A,B should be interpreted as a signal-conversion chain rather than as a simple component list: the biorecognition layer controls analyte specificity, the electrode/transducer determines the electrical response, nanostructured amplification layers improve electron transfer and lower the detection limit, and signal-processing tools convert raw current, potential or impedance into a food-quality decision. This interpretation is important because failure at any one stage, such as weak immobilization, electrode fouling or poor data calibration, can reduce the reliability of the complete biosensor system.

Figure 3

3.2.1 Biorecognition elements

Enzymes remain the cornerstone of biosensor recognition. Their catalytic specificity enables real-time detection of target molecules, including biogenic amines, sugars, and organic acids. Between 2022 and 2025, research has focused on enzyme stabilization strategies such as sol–gel entrapment, cross-linking with nanopolymers, and co-immobilization of multiple enzymes for multi-analyte sensing (Gama Cavalcante et al., 2024; Reyes-De-Corcuera et al., 2018). These strategies address challenges of enzyme denaturation under industrial conditions and extend sensor shelf life. Antibody-based immunosensors exploit the high specificity of antigen–antibody interactions. Nanostructured gold, graphene, and conductive polymers have been widely adopted to improve antibody orientation, binding efficiency, and antifouling properties (Cai et al., 2023). Recent innovations include dual-antibody sandwich assays for pathogen detection and disposable paper-based immunosensors, enabling rapid on-site analysis of food contamination (Chen et al., 2025; Nsanzabera et al., 2024). Aptamers are synthetic oligonucleotides selected through Systematic Evolution of Ligands by Exponential Enrichment (SELEX). have emerged as highly versatile recognition units. Their ability to be chemically engineered for small molecules, proteins, or cells makes them attractive alternatives to antibodies (Khaleque et al., 2024). Aptamer-based electrochemical sensors often exhibit greater stability, reproducibility, and reusability across diverse food matrices than their protein-based counterparts (Yuan et al., 2021). Whole-cell biosensors utilize microbial metabolism as the recognition event. They detect changes in respiration, metabolite production, or toxin sensitivity (Moraskie et al., 2021). Such sensors are particularly useful in monitoring global spoilage patterns, since cells naturally respond to complex mixtures rather than single analytes.

3.2.2 Transducers and signal amplification

The transducer translates biorecognition events into measurable electrical signals. Traditional Electrodes, such as Gold, platinum, and carbon electrodes remain the gold standard, but their modification with graphene, carbon nanotubes (CNTs), or conductive polymers has dramatically enhanced sensitivity and reduced fouling (Shen et al., 2024). Nanostructured Interfaces, such as Integration of 2D materials such as graphene oxide, MoS₂, and MXenes has expanded the electroactive surface area and accelerated electron transfer rates (Zou et al., 2020).

Hybrid and Paper-based Systems, such as Inkjet printing and 3D origami platforms enable mass production of low-cost disposable biosensors suitable for point-of-sale freshness monitoring (Garcia-Cruz et al., 2020). Microfluidics Integration, such as Combining biosensors with microfluidic systems allows precise control of sample delivery, multiplexing, and reagent mixing, enhancing reproducibility (Zhang C. et al., 2025; Zhang J. et al., 2025; Zhang T. et al., 2025).

3.2.3 Signal processing and data interpretation

The raw electrical signal must be processed and interpreted for reliable decision-making, AI and Machine Learning, such as Algorithms distinguish spoilage-related signal patterns from background noise, forecast shelf life, and even classify spoilage stages (Gupta et al., 2023). Wireless Connectivity, such as Integration of Bluetooth, radio frequency identification (RFID), and near field communication (NFC), facilitates sensor-to-smartphone communication, enabling decentralized food safety management (Zhang et al., 2022). Cloud Analytics and Visualization, such as Biosensor outputs can be archived on cloud platforms for supply chain monitoring, predictive analytics, and regulatory compliance (Nath, 2024).

3.3 Types of electrochemical-based biosensors for food spoilage detection

Electrochemical biosensors are electrochemical transducers coupled with various biological elements, such as enzymes, nucleic acids, viruses and antibodies (Li et al., 2024). These biological entities can be detected by converting their information into useful electrical signals, such as voltage, current or impedance. The first electrochemical biosensor was developed by Clark to monitor the glucose level in human blood serum (Ambaye et al., 2024). They are made up of three different electrodes, namely, the working, reference and counter electrodes, which control the flow of electrons and bioagents. Various developed electrochemical biosensors will be discussed in this section. Moreover, Table 1 presents the comprehensive information on electrochemical biosensors for foodborne pathogen detection.

3.3.1 Amperometric biosensors

Amperometry measures the current generated by the oxidation or reduction of an electroactive substance during a biochemical reaction. Amperometric biosensors apply a constant or pulsed potential in an electrochemical cell to monitor this current at the working electrode, typically made of Pt, Au, or carbon. The working mechanism of amperometric biosensors has been shown in Figure 4A. These biosensors use two electrodes—one to apply voltage and the other to measure current—while a reference electrode, which may also serve as an auxiliary electrode at low currents, maintains a steady potential. The resulting current is directly proportional to the concentration of the electroactive analyte, or to its rate of production or consumption, in the biocatalytic layer. Sensitivity is determined by analyzing current responses at various analyte concentrations based on their redox potentials, enabling accurate quantification via oxidation-derived current signals (Guo et al., 2023). This feature enhances amperometry’s sensitivity, enabling it to detect low analyte concentrations, which is especially beneficial for trace analysis (Umar et al., 2023). Figure 4A illustrates why amperometric biosensors are commonly reported as high-sensitivity platforms: the analyte or enzymatically generated product is converted directly into an oxidation or reduction current at a fixed potential. This direct current-concentration relationship makes amperometry attractive for early detection of electroactive spoilage markers such as histamine, lactate and peroxide-linked enzymatic products.

Figure 4

Istrate et al. (2021) determined the L-lactic acid in milk and wine using an amperometric biosensor by immobilizing the L-lactate dehydrogenase enzyme on a screen-printed electrode. The electrode was modified using a composite of gold nanoparticles, poly(allylamine hydrochloride), and reduced graphene oxide. The biosensor showed good selectivity, and the limit of detection (LOD) was 1 μM. To check the freshness of the fish, Torre et al. (2020) construct an amperometric, low-cost histamine sensor by immobilizing diamine oxidase on a screen-printed carbon electrode. This sensor was tested on spiked tuna and mackerel extracts and had a limit of detection of around 0.97 mg L⁻¹. It thereby demonstrated high sensitivity and selectivity for histamine, with a recovery of 99–100%. Biogenic amines produced by microorganisms are indicators of food spoilage (2025) developed a portable amperometric biosensor for the detection of biogenic amines to correlate with microorganism production and food spoilage. They developed a putrescine and histamine sensor by immobilizing diamine and monoamine oxidases in sol–gel and chitosan matrices, entrapped in a single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) nanocomposite, on modified screen-printed electrodes. The biosensors showed sensitivities and LODs towards putrescine and histamine of 168.9 mA M−1 cm−² and 31.6 mA M−1 cm−², and 4.2 μM and 9.8 μM, respectively.

Over the past decade, significant improvements have been observed in the development of amperometric biosensors for the determination of various spoilage-associated compounds, including biogenic amines, organic acids, pathogen-specific microorganisms, and volatile metabolites (Majer-Baranyi et al., 2023; Monošík et al., 2012). This has been achieved by integrating nanomaterials, such as graphene, carbon nanotubes, and metal nanoparticles, with enzyme-based recognition elements. This has significantly improved the analytical performance of amperometric biosensors, as evidenced by the wide range of analytes detected, from micromolar to picomolar concentrations (Malik et al., 2023; Qu et al., 2025). Moreover, enzyme-based amperometric biosensors have been shown to offer better selectivity and detection time than conventional methods. Also, from an industrial perspective, amperometric biosensors are highly promising for large-scale implementation owing to their cost-effectiveness, and they can be easily integrated with wearable, flexible, and Internet-of-Things technologies for food packaging. However, challenges such as matrices, especially in dairy and meat products, remain barriers to commercialization (Nath, 2024). Overall, amperometric biosensors are among the most promising technologies for detecting food spoilage, owing to their sensitivity, detection time, and cost-effectiveness.

3.3.2 Potentiometric biosensors

Potentiometric biosensors measure the voltage (potential) change during the chemical interaction at zero current (Walker et al., 2021). The working electrode serves as an ion-selective or gas-selective electrode to generate analytical data. Potentiometric biosensors generally utilize two (WE and RE) or three electrodes (WE, RE and CE), and the potential difference between WE and RE indicates the chemical reaction. For the determination of food spoilage, various voltammetric biosensor methods are utilized, such as cyclic voltammetry (CV), differential pulse voltammetry (DPV), and square-wave voltammetry (SWV). The working principle of potentiometric biosensors is shown in Figure 4B. Figure 4B emphasizes the key difference between potentiometric and amperometric sensing. Potentiometric systems measure potential changes under near-zero current conditions, making them low-power and simple for pH, ammonia, formaldehyde and ion-related freshness indicators, but also more vulnerable to drift, ionic-strength effects and membrane fouling in complex food matrices.

Potentiometric biosensors have focused on incorporating ion-selective membranes, molecularly imprinted polymers, and nanostructured materials to enhance specificity for major spoilage markers, such as ammonia, carbon dioxide, hydrogen ions (pH), and biogenic amines, in complex matrices (Kashyap et al., 2022). This technique has been shown to provide low detection limits in the sub-micromolar to nanomolar range, along with good specificity and simplicity(Walker et al., 2021). However, this technique is significantly affected by environmental factors, such as ionic strength and buffer capacity. Compared to other electrochemical techniques, potentiometric biosensors are inexpensive and consume low power, but are associated with lower sensitivity than amperometric biosensors and lesser multi-analyte specificity than voltammetric and impedimetric biosensors. However, the challenges of potentiometric biosensors lie in signal drift, membrane fouling, and limited ability to measure non-ionic species.

Due to improper storage of meat and dairy product the biogenic amine Tyramine is produced by different bacteria. Draz et al. (2021) developed a solid-state potentiometric sensor for the detection of tyramine with a LOD of 7.9 ppm and a limit of quantification (LOQ) of 10.6 ppm. The sensor had a response time of 5–10 s and detected tyramine in blue cheese, aged cheese, Egyptian pickled cottage cheese, and pickled herring in real time. Nurlely et al. (2021) developed a membrane-based potentiometric biosensor for rapid detection of formaldehyde in dried foods, fish, seafood, oil and fats, using poly (n-butyl acrylate-co-N-acryloxysuccinimide) as both a pH-sensitive transducer and an enzyme-supporting matrix on an Ag/AgCl screen-printed electrode. This biosensor quantified formaldehyde using simple ion-transfer electrochemistry at the interface of the H⁺-selective membrane. At the interface, ion-ionophore complexation occurred due to enzymatic oxidation of formaldehyde, which increased the potential difference between the WE and the RE. The potentiometric enzyme biosensor exhibited a broad linear range of detection of formaldehyde from 0.5 to 220.0 mM. The sensor showed a fast response time of 8 s and sensitivity of 59.23 ± 0.85 mV/decade. For freshness monitoring, pH sensing can also be done because it can indicate microbial growth. Mahtab and Deen (2022) developed porous nanocomposite RuO₂/GO electrochemical pH sensors via drop-casting onto a carbon electrode. The homogeneous distribution of RuO₂ nanoparticles within GO nanosheets facilitated the rapid diffusion of liquid ions for sensing. The sensor was validated by studying the drift and hysteresis measurements, with values of 0.36 mV h⁻¹ and 0.8 mV, respectively. The sensor showed a high pH sensitivity of 55.3 mV/pH and a fast response time of less than 2 s.

3.3.3 Impedimetric biosensors

An impedimetric sensor works by detecting changes in electrical impedance caused by variations in the analyte’s activity. It measures food spoilage by monitoring microbial growth and enzymatic activities, which alter the dielectric properties of food materials, leading to measurable changes in impedance. Impedimetric sensors monitor in real time and provide several benefits over traditional methods for food analysis, which can take 2 to 10 days for detection (Bancalari et al., 2024). Quantifying complex impedance over a frequency band from 0.1 Hz to 100 kHz helps analyze various electrochemical processes. This frequency-dependent study helps distinguish spoilage sources and provides many detection parameters (Ameer et al., 2023). Moreover, Figure 5 displayed the working mechanism of the impedimetric sensor. Figure 5 highlights the label-free nature of impedimetric detection. The binding of microbial cells, toxins or volatile-compound recognition complexes changes interfacial resistance and capacitance, which can be followed over a frequency range. This makes impedance useful for real-time microbial growth monitoring, although reliable interpretation requires careful control of matrix conductivity, electrode stability and non-specific adsorption.

Figure 5

The analytical performance of the impedimetric sensor is significantly improved by integrating nanomaterials, such as metallic or graphene nanoparticles, which also increase detection limits, specificity, and linear ranges (Verma et al., 2025). Compared to an amperometric sensor, an impedimetric sensor shows a longer detection time (Chauhan and Thakur, 2023). A key strength of an impedimetric sensor is its label-free detection, portability, high sensitivity, and low power consumption, making it suitable for real-time, in-situ food quality monitoring devices that are comparable to voltammetric sensors but lack detailed redox information (Sumitha and Xavier, 2023). However, the impedimetric sensor also had limitations, such as reliability in complex food quality detection and electrode surface instability (Nath, 2024). Overall, the impedimetric sensor is a highly promising and versatile platform for food spoilage detection, offering an optimal balance between sensitivity and label-free operation, thereby enhancing real-world applicability and bridging the gap between laboratory development and industrial deployment.

Microbial degradation in food matrices often leads to the emission of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which serve as critical markers of spoilage. Calabrese et al. (2023) developed a non-Faradaic impedimetric biosensor to detect these VOCs, employing pig odorant-binding protein (pOBP) as the molecular recognition component. The pOBP was immobilized on a gold electrode modified with a self-assembled monolayer, facilitating selective detection. The biosensor’s affinity was assessed for three volatile organic compounds (VOCs) typically linked to food degradation are 1-octen-3-ol, trans-2-hexen-1-ol, and hexanal. Impedimetric measurements were effectively performed on both liquid and air samples, with the device exhibiting a detection limit of 0.1 μM for each component. This method emphasizes the capability of pOBP-based biosensors for sensitive and selective assessment of food freshness.

Impedimetric data can not only detect microbial cell counts but also assess cell viability, growth rate and the VOCs produced by them. The applicability of the sensor was better understood by Mareze et al. (2022), who investigated the potential of cell-free supernatants derived from Lactobacillus plantarum as antibacterial and antifungal agents. Lactobacilli were first isolated from an artisanal Brazilian cheese and subsequently assessed for their antibacterial activity against toxigenic Penicillium sp. and pathogenic bacteria commonly found in cheese. Two Lactiplantibacillus plantarum isolates, L49 and L119, were selected for further examination of their antifungal and antibacterial properties. The findings indicated that both strains exhibited significant antibacterial activity beyond mere acidification. The findings indicate that L. plantarum L49 and L119 have the capacity to suppress harmful microbes and may be viable candidates for innovative protective cultures in cheese manufacturing.

An exceptionally sensitive impedimetric aptasensor was designed by Kang et al. (2023) for the detection of DON in bread and wheat flour, employing a defective bimetallic metal–organic framework (ZrTi-MOF). The structural characteristics of ZrTi-MOF, including elevated porosity, extensive surface area, mixed metal clusters, and numerous flaws, significantly improved its electrochemical properties and facilitated effective aptamer immobilization. The fundamental sensing technique relied on impedance variations resulting from the specific interaction between the aptamer and DON, enabling accurate, label-free detection. Under optimal conditions, the impedimetric aptasensor achieved an exceptionally low detection limit of 0.24 fg mL⁻¹ over a dynamic range of 1 fg mL⁻¹ to 1 ng mL⁻¹. Furthermore, the sensor exhibited exceptional selectivity, repeatability, stability, and regeneration capacity. This study detected mycotoxins, such as deoxynivalenol (DON), which are cytotoxic and immunotoxic and are produced under improper storage conditions that allow the fungus to attack grains, beans, nuts, and other fruits.

3.3.4 Voltammetric biosensors

Voltammetric sensors are advanced analytical instruments that measure current responses to applied voltages to detect and quantify analytes in diverse matrices. These sensors have become essential instruments in chemical analysis, biomedical diagnostics, environmental monitoring, food safety, and industrial process control owing to their great sensitivity, selectivity, and rapid reaction times (Tajik et al., 2021). The operational mechanism comprises a three-electrode system a working electrode for redox reactions, a reference electrode that maintains a steady voltage, and a counter electrode that completes the electrical circuit. When a voltage is applied to the working electrode, it affects the electrochemical reactions at the electrode surface, and the measured current adheres to Faraday’s Law. This law states that the current produced is exactly proportional to the concentration of electroactive species in solution. Therefore, this relationship enables quantitative analysis of target analytes based on the magnitude of the current response.

Recent advancements have focused on modifications using nanomaterials, improvements in electrode designs, and innovative waveform techniques, which have markedly increased sensor performance, enabling detection limits in the picomolar range and applications ranging from heavy metal detection to biomolecule analysis. In this regard, Kouhi et al. (2022) developed an electrochemical sensor based on Adsorptive stripping differential pulse voltammetry (AdSDPV) for vanillin detection in various food materials. The designed sensor showed astonishing results, with concentrations ranging from 4.15 to 294.12 μM. They further observed that, by modifying the carbon electrode with multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs), the detection sensitivity of vanillin was improved to sub-micromolar levels, with a limit of detection of 3.44 μM. So, this proposed sensor, owing to its simplicity and capability to detect residual levels, can be readily utilized in quality control laboratories and industrial assessments to quantify vanillin. Another such was developed by modifying a glassy carbon electrode with the deposition of 4-Amino-5-hydrazino-1,2,4-triazole-3-thiol on its surface for the detection of the artificial azo dye–based food additive sunset yellow in orange-flavored drinks and instant powder drinks. The researchers optimized the parameters of the square wave voltammetry technique to observe the highest current peak for sunset yellow in food samples. The operational range was determined to consist of three linear concentration intervals from 4.97 nM to 1.18 μM, 1.18 μM to 15.16 μM, and 15.16 μM to 0.153 mM. with the limit of detection value determined as 1.15 nM (Calam and Çakıcı, 2023). Another crucial application of this voltammetric sensor involves the detection of pesticides in food commodities. Metribuzin (MTZ) is a widely used herbicide that poses significant risks to environmental integrity and public health. For that, an electrochemical sensor was developed to detect it in the commercial product (Egyscor® 70%) and in spiked tomato and potato samples, with recovery values ranging from 97.12 to 103.41%. In this, the researchers utilized a bulk-polymerized molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP), synthesized using itaconic acid as the functional monomer and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate as the crosslinker, at an optimal molar ratio of 1:5:30, respectively. Further, they employed Differential pulse voltammetry to optimize the MIP-based sensor. Thus, the sensor demonstrated selective adsorption capability and exhibited strong linearity across the concentration spectrum of 0.2 ng/mL to 21.429 μg/mL, with limits of detection (LOD) and quantification (LOQ) of 0.1 pg./mL and 0.3 pg./mL, respectively (Fatah et al., 2023). Voltammetric biosensors typically achieve very low detection limits (often in the nano- to picomolar range), wide linear detection ranges, and rapid response times, making them highly competitive with Amperometric biosensors (Lopez-Tellez et al., 2022). The key strengths of voltammetric biosensors are their high analytical resolution and the ability to detect multiple analytes, as different analytes produce distinct voltammetric peaks, a significant advantage over potentiometric and amperometric sensors. They show faster detection than impedimetric biosensors; however, their higher instrumental complexity compared to potentiometric biosensors and susceptibility to electrode fouling affect reproducibility and real-world applications (Sumitha and Xavier, 2023). The future study should focus on automating, optimizing, and simplifying the design to facilitate the transition from the laboratory to practical industrial applications.

3.4 Spoilage biomarkers

Biogenic Amines are Produced by amino acid decarboxylation, amines such as histamine, cadaverine, and tyramine serve as established freshness indicators in fish, meat, and dairy. Advanced enzyme-linked amperometric biosensors now achieve sub-micromolar detection limits (Kashyap et al., 2022). Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are produced by lipid oxidation and microbial metabolism. Aptameric and whole-cell impedimetric biosensors have been developed to identify VOC signatures in dairy and bakery products (Calabrese et al., 2023). For Microbial pathogens and spoilage bacteria, immunosensors and aptasensors target bacterial surface proteins, enabling label-free detection in less than an hour (Guo et al., 2025). These are highly relevant in the meat and dairy field. Biosensors that measure pH shifts and lactic/acetic acid accumulation correlate well with microbial spoilage in perishable foods and fresh produce (Majer-Baranyi et al., 2023).

Recent Innovations in Detection are Multiplexed Detection, Microarray-based biosensors simultaneously measure biogenic amines, VOCs, and microbial markers, increasing accuracy while minimizing false positives (Hosseinikebria et al., 2025). Label-Free Real-Time Monitoring comprises impedance and field-effect transistor (FET)-based biosensors enable non-invasive monitoring directly on food surfaces (Karmakar et al., 2025). smart packaging integration printed biosensors embedded in packaging materials continuously monitor spoilage and communicate with smartphones to trigger consumer alerts (Sobhan et al., 2025). Looking ahead, the convergence of nanotechnology, microfluidics, flexible electronics, and artificial intelligence will make electrochemical biosensors central to decentralized, real-time, and cost-effective food safety systems.

4 Biorecognition elements in an electrochemical biosensor

4.1 Enzyme-based biosensor

Enzymatic sensors utilize the astonishing catalytic ability of enzymes, which are biological macromolecules that accelerate specific metabolic reactions by factors often exceeding 10⁷, without undergoing permanent alteration. Its mechanism of action involves the binding of substrate molecules to their highly selective active sites, forming transient enzyme–substrate complexes that convert substrates into products repeatedly, enabling their reuse across multiple reaction cycles. Compared to synthetic catalysts operating under identical conditions, enzymes typically exhibit superior turnover rates and substrate affinities. Consequently, they have become foundational biorecognition elements in electrochemical sensor design. In such devices, the target enzyme is immobilized directly on an electrode surface—frequently within or on conductive matrices or nanostructured materials—to facilitate efficient electron transfer between the catalytic center and the transducer. Upon exposure to the corresponding substrate, the enzymatic reaction generates electroactive species or alters the local chemical environment, producing a measurable current proportional to analyte concentration. The different methods for immobilizing are shown in Figure 6A. This strategy underpins a wide array of enzyme-based electrochemical sensors, combining the inherent selectivity of biocatalysts with the sensitivity of modern nanomaterials.

Figure 6

Various enzymatic electrochemical sensors have been employed to detect biomolecules, pathogens, toxins, etc., ensuring the overall safety of consumers. A study was performed by Lipińska et al. (2021), in which they developed a glucose oxidase-based electrochemical sensor in which the enzyme was entrapped in chitosan and immobilized on novel gold-titanium-based electrodes. The gold nanoparticles were embedded in a chitosan matrix modified with an enzyme for real-time detection of glucose in human body fluids. These results confirmed that this sensor exhibits brilliant performance for glucose recognition with a wide linear range of 0.04–15.05 and 15.05–40.00 mM, with sensitivity of 23.47 ± 1.36 and 10.63 ± 1.28 μAcm⁻² mM⁻¹, respectively, and a very low limit of detection 1.75 ± 0.30 μM (Lipińska et al., 2021).

Recent investigations have focused on the use of third-generation enzyme-immobilized biosensors, which operate by attaching bioactive molecules to the surfaces of nanomaterials via linkers and surface modifications. A study by Ghanei Agh Kaariz et al. (2020) developed an enzyme-based electrochemical biosensor for cholesterol detection. The development involved a nanocomposite electrode composed of gold nanoparticles, zinc oxide nanoparticles, and multi-walled carbon nanotubes, onto which cholesterol oxidase enzyme was immobilized. This nanocomposite-based electrode exhibited improved electron transport and has superior analytical linearity. The synthesized electrode demonstrated a low detection limit (0.1 μM), high sensitivity (25.89 μA/μM) as assessed by DPV over the detection range of 0.1–100 μM, and significant selectivity for cholesterol determination. Another study, Villalonga et al. (2019), developed a disposable biosensor for the rapid and quantitative detection of Brettanomyces bruxellensis in red wine. The core/shell structure was altered with Fe₃O₄ and SiO₂ superparamagnetic nanoparticles on a screen–printed electrode, and Concanavalin A was covalently bonded to the surface. These sensors, when applied to actual wine samples, exhibited excellent performance in terms of linear response range, repeatability, selectivity, stability, and detection limit. Therefore, a linear range of 10–10⁶ CFU/mL and a detection limit of 5 CFU/mL.

4.2 Antibody-based biosensor

Antibody-based electrochemical biosensors, known as immunosensors, are affinity biosensors that transduce the particular interaction between an immobilized antibody and its target antigen into an electrical signal (Guo et al., 2023). A capture antibody is covalently bonded to the working electrode during operation. Upon binding of the target antigen to the antibody on the electrode surface, the electrochemical parameters at that interface (e.g., local charge, capacitance, or impedance) are modified, resulting in a quantifiable electrical response (Rizzotto et al., 2023). The working mechanism of antibody-based electrochemical biosensors has been displayed in Figure 6B. The creation of immunocomplexes can be identified by label-based amplification methods (such as enzyme or nanoparticle tags on a secondary antibody that produce a current) or through label-free techniques (which involve directly assessing the physical alterations resulting from antigen binding) (Shen et al., 2024). Immunosensors integrate the high specificity of antibody–antigen interactions with sensitive electrochemical transduction, facilitating the detection of low concentrations of biomarkers in complicated samples (Kumar et al., 2025).

New innovations in immunosensors significantly utilize nanostructured materials. The integration of metal nanoparticles (Au, Pt), carbon nanomaterials (graphene, carbon nanotubes), or nanostructured composites onto the electrode surface markedly enhances active surface area and conductivity, hence intensifying the signal (Shen et al., 2024). These gold nanoparticles may serve as catalysts or carriers for redox labels, whereas CNT/graphene layers can enhance electron transfer and antibody loading. Additionally, innovative nanomaterials such as metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) have been investigated to enhance sensitivity. These advancements have lowered detection limits to the low picomolar or even femtomolar range for numerous analytes (Kumar et al., 2025). A multitude of studies have been conducted to assess food contaminants and pathogens, including the detection of bacterial pathogens in food, mycotoxins (aflatoxins) in cereals, pesticide residues, and antibiotic levels in dairy products. One such study, conducted by Tang et al. (2022) on milk samples, revealed that the constructed immunosensor showed a commendable linearity range of 0.25–5.0 ng/mL, with a detection limit of 0.09 ng/mL. They specifically indicate that the anti-idiotype, a functional heavy-chain antibody devoid of a light chain (AIdnb), substituted for the hazardous antigen and was immobilized on the surface of SPCE via covalent coupling as a capture reagent. Under these conditions, the sensor attained sub-ng/mL sensitivity in milk. Moreover, for complex food matrices, label-free immunosensors can swiftly detect specific toxins in real time. These instruments provide on-site assessments of food quality and safety, potentially averting outbreaks of foodborne illness, such as the detection of pathogenic Salmonella using a Fe3O4@Prussian blue (PB) core-shell nanomaterial-based electrochemical immunosensor. They found the limit of detection for the pathogen to be 9.912 CFU mL-¹.

4.3 DNA/aptamer-based biosensor

Aptamers are short, synthetic single-stranded DNA or RNA oligonucleotides selected via Systematic Evolution of Ligands by Exponential Enrichment (SELEX) to bind specific targets with high affinity (Léguillier et al., 2024). Aptamers, like antibodies, adopt distinctive three-dimensional conformations that identify proteins, small molecules, cells, or ions; they exhibit chemical stability and can be readily manufactured or modified (Sanjay et al., 2025). Moreover, the working principle of an aptamer-based sensor has been illustrated in Figure 7A. In an aptasensor, target binding elicits a conformational alteration or a competitive binding event that is converted into a quantifiable signal. An electrochemical aptasensor immobilizes a thiolated DNA aptamer on an electrode; upon target binding, the aptamer undergoes conformational folding, altering charge transfer and generating a current or impedance change (Léguillier et al., 2024). In fluorescent aptasensors, a dye-labeled aptamer may undergo quenching (or dequenching) upon binding, leading to a fluorescence signal. The versatility of nucleic acid chemistry enables label-free designs (e.g., aptamer-complement duplexes with intercalating dyes) or multiplexed constructions (e.g., multi-aptamer probes) (Geleta, 2023). Aptamer-based biosensors have been developed for a wide range of food safety analytes. They enable rapid, sensitive and portable detection of pathogens, allergens, pesticides, mycotoxins and other contaminants, often directly in complex matrices with minimal preparation (Sun et al., 2024).

Figure 7

A newly engineered bacterial electrochemical aptasensor was created for the selective and highly sensitive detection of S. aureus at the single-cell level via a sandwich assay (Lin et al., 2023). The aptasensor utilized dual recognition via a bacteria-imprinted polymer film (BIF) and an aptamer. The BIF, functioning as a capture probe, was immobilized on a glassy carbon electrode, while the aptamer, acting as a detection probe, was modified with 6-ferrocenylhexanediol on gold nanoparticles (AuNPs). The aptamer was synthesized with a thiol group at its 5′-end to facilitate its covalent attachment to the AuNPs. Following the immobilization of S. aureus on the BIF-modified electrode, the AuNP–aptamers were added to bind the trapped bacteria, resulting in an enhanced current signal. The accomplished ultrasensitive detection facilitated the identification of a single S. aureus cell in a buffer solution. The limit of detection of the aptasensor was 10 CFU/mL in complex, lipid-rich solutions like milk. The elevated sensitivity indicates the sensor’s relevance in food safety and prevention.

These aptasensors demonstrate significant potential for identifying prevalent food allergens (peanut proteins, shellfish tropomyosin, gluten) against which aptamers have been selected for their principle epitopes. Studies performed by the researcher in which aptasensors for the peanut allergens Ara h1 and Ara h₂, utilizing fluorescence or electrochemical detection methods, were developed. In this, a smartphone-connected fluorescence assay employed an Ara h1 aptamer and lanthanide nanoparticles to identify peanut residue in milk (Melinte et al., 2023). Various studies have focused on the development of electrochemical aptasensors utilizing nanomaterial-enhanced electrodes (graphene, AuNPs) to detect Ara h1 in nut-containing foods, gluten (gliadin) and shellfish tropomyosin, histamine in fish, etc., with nanogram-per-milliliter sensitivity (Inês and Cosme, 2025).

4.4 Microbial-based biosensor

Microbial electrochemical sensors utilize living cells (bacteria, fungi, algae) or their enzymes to transform target analytes into electrical signals. In these biosensors, bio electrocatalysis is essential for biological catalysts (whole-cell biofilms or enzymes) facilitate redox reactions at an electrode, merging the high selectivity of biocatalysis with the efficiency of electrocatalysis (Chen et al., 2020). Moreover, the working principle of microbial electrochemical sensors has been illustrated in Figure 7B. In a microbial fuel cell (MFC), electroactive bacteria oxidize a chemical substrate (e.g., acetate), releasing electrons that traverse an external circuit to the cathode, thereby producing a detectable current (Yao et al., 2023). Electroactive biofilms function in two ways, such as anodic biofilms transfer electrons to the anode while oxidizing substrates, and cathodic biofilms receive electrons from the electrode (Chen et al., 2020). Microbes often transport electrons through direct electron transfer (DET) utilizing membrane cytochromes or conductive pili, or via mediated electron transfer (MET) employing secreted redox shuttles such as flavins and phenazines (Zhou et al., 2017). These microbial sensors convert a metabolic reaction into an electrical signal (current or voltage) (Inês and Cosme, 2025). Unlike conventional biosensors, which require additional mediators or labels, microbial sensors provide self-sustaining functionality and direct electrical outputs (Klevinskas et al., 2021). Consequently, the generated voltage or current can be observed in real time using simple circuitry. This renders them appealing for in situ, continuous surveillance of environmental and food-related issues.

Recent studies have used continuous monitoring of food freshness, such as in packaged meat or dairy, by employing microbial sensors to detect volatile indicators of deterioration. A proposal involves incorporating a microbiological biofilm that responds to spoilage gases (ammonia, hydrogen sulfide) using an electronic tongue (Funari and Shen, 2022). A pertinent method involves using redox polymers or conductive surfaces to regulate the proliferation of spoilage bacteria in biofilms (Haghighian and Kataky, 2024). Microbial electrochemical sensing in food safety is an emerging field that complements existing approaches such as immunosensors and PCR, offering the potential for reagent-free, real-time detection(Funari and Shen, 2022).

The utilization of MFC sensors has effectively identified numerous chemical hazards in food and water, including heavy metal ions in irrigation and drinking water. Therefore, a recent soil-MFC cathode sensor demonstrated selective responsiveness to Cd²⁺, Zn²⁺, Pb²⁺, and Hg²⁺, with a linear detection range of 0.5–30 mg/L (Wang S. H. et al., 2023; Wang W. et al., 2023). Pesticide and herbicide applications raise additional concerns that contribute to food safety challenges. To achieve this, a photosynthetic microbial fuel cell using Scenedesmus algae was deployed to detect atrazine by measuring reductions in cathodic oxygen production. This sensor exhibited a sensitivity of approximately 1.39 ppm⁻¹·cm⁻² and consistently detected atrazine at concentrations ranging from 0.05 to 0.3 ppm (Chouler and Di Lorenzo, 2019). Another significant issue is organic compounds, such as mycotoxins and antibiotics (Massaglia et al., 2023). However, the literature is scarce on the detection of food spoilage, specifically volatile amines or organic acids produced by bacteria or fungi. This may be inferred indirectly from microbial metabolism (e.g., anaerobic respiration of amino acid decarboxylation products), which represents a promising avenue for further investigation.

5 Applications of electrochemical biosensors in different food products

5.1 Meat and poultry

Electrochemical biosensors have been widely explored for monitoring food freshness and contamination across diverse food matrices, including meat, dairy, and seafood products (Ashiq et al., 2024). These sensors detect volatile substances, such as biogenic amines (e.g., putrescine, cadaverine), generated during microbial decomposition (Kannan et al., 2020). Enzyme-based biosensors, including those that utilize amine oxidase, provide real-time quantification of amines via amperometric signals, enabling rapid spoilage assessment in products such as chicken and beef (Erna et al., 2021). Sensors equipped with metal-oxide semiconductors detect gases such as hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, providing information on microbial activity in processed meats (Preethichandra et al., 2023).

Foodborne pathogen detection is vital application in meat products (Stephen Inbaraj and Chen, 2016). Electrochemical immunosensors employ antibodies immobilized on nanostructured electrodes (e.g., gold nanoparticles, graphene) to detect Salmonella, E. coli, and Listeria via impedance or voltammetric change (Subjakova et al., 2021). A fluorescent lateral flow immunoassay (FLFIA) achieved a sensitive detection limit of 178 CFU/g E. coli O157: H7 in minced beef, enabling rapid, cost-effective pathogen monitoring (Hassan et al., 2019).

Quality indicators such as pH, glucose, and lactate are evaluated to assess freshness (Moreno et al., 2020). Potentiometric pH sensors embedded in smart packaging monitor alterations in meat acidity, whereas enzymatic biosensors quantify lactate levels by lactate oxidase reactions, which correlate with microbial proliferation in meat (Sionek et al., 2020; Waimin et al., 2022). Detection of antibiotic residues is also essential for regulatory adherence in meat products (Kumar et al., 2020; Moga et al., 2021). Aptamer-based sensors preferentially bind residues such as sulfonamides in meat, producing quantifiable current variations (Moga et al., 2021). An innovative electrochemical biosensor for the impedimetric assessment of sulfadimethoxine (SDM) was developed by altering pencil graphite electrodes with reduced graphene oxide and gold nanoparticles. The developed aptasensor attained an exceptionally low detection limit of 3.7 × 10⁻¹⁶ M and was effectively utilized for precise and dependable. SDM measurement in meat samples (Mohammad-Razdari et al., 2019).

Heavy metal poisoning in meat and poultry is a major threat to human health, as even minute levels of lead, cadmium, and mercury can have serious toxicological consequences (Singh et al., 2016). Electrochemical sensors have emerged as key tools for monitoring these pollutants due to their high sensitivity, rapid response time, and low cost. The sensor based on UiO-66-NH2@MWCNTs was successfully developed by Wang et al. (2021) for Cd2 + detection and demonstrated outstanding electrochemical performance. It displayed exceptional sensitivity, with a limit of detection of 0.2 μg/L, and reliability in identifying Cd²⁺ in real samples, hence indicating tremendous potential for heavy metal monitoring. The application of various types of electrochemical biosensors for food products is summarized in Table 2.

5.2 Fish and seafood

Microbial spoilage is a serious concern in fish and shellfish because bacterial activity produces volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which accelerate degradation (Kuuliala et al., 2018; Odeyemi et al., 2018). Microbial spoilage in fish and seafood, driven by bacterial metabolism, releases volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trimethylamine (TMA), hydrogen sulfide (H₂S), and ammonia (Bekhit et al., 2021; Nami et al., 2024; Odeyemi et al., 2018; Parlapani et al., 2024). A disposable biogenic amine biosensor for histamine determination in fish was developed with carbon electrodes, modified with a composite of TiO₂ nanoparticles, carboxylated multi-walled carbon nanotubes, a redox mediator, and chitosan. Diamine oxidase (DAO) or monoamine oxidase (MAO) enzymes were immobilized via EDC/NHS chemistry. The DAO-based biosensor exhibited enhanced sensitivity, a broader linear dynamic range, and a lower detection limit than the MAO-based sensor. Histamine determination in real fish samples was successfully demonstrated, with recoveries ranging from 100.0 to 104.6% (Koçoǧlu et al., 2020). Moreover, carbon nanotube-based sensors have demonstrated enhanced sensitivity in detecting volatile amines in fish and seafood matrices (Sarkar et al., 2018; Singh et al., 2023; Yazdanparast et al., 2019). Graphene-based electrode systems have proven effective for real-time monitoring of fish freshness (Parate et al., 2020; Xia et al., 2023). Additionally, amperometric sensors augmented with polysulfone/carbon nanotubes/ferrocene membrane have been designed to detect low histamine concentrations quickly and consistently (Pérez et al., 2013).

Heavy metal contamination from environmental pollution is another major concern for the quality of fish and seafood. Common pollutants such as cadmium, lead, chromium, copper, zinc and other heavy metals can accumulate in fish tissues, often exceeding safe consumption limits. These metals may cause toxic and carcinogenic effects, highlighting the need for continuous monitoring and regulation (Saher and Kanwal, 2019). Electrochemical sensors based on carbon nanotubes have been used to detect trace levels of heavy metals in fish and shellfish, leveraging their superior conductivity and sensitivity (Meng et al., 2023). Graphene-modified electrodes have been used to detect cadmium and lead in fish in real time. A glassy carbon electrode modified with electrochemically reduced graphene oxide and gold nanorods, and a screen-printed electrode modified with ZnO-reduced graphene oxide, were used to detect As(III), Cd²⁺, and Pb²⁺ in seafood. Parameters, including deposition potential and time, were optimized, with validation using certified reference materials and real sample analysis, achieving detection limits of 0.16–0.21 μg L⁻¹ (Pichún et al., 2024; Zhang et al., 2017). Metal oxide semiconductor sensors, such as those based on titanium dioxide and zinc oxide, are used for the selective detection of mercury and lead in complex food matrices (Wu J. et al., 2023; Wu K. et al., 2023).

Colorimetric sensors have emerged as a promising tool for monitoring fish and seafood, enabling rapid, non-invasive, and cost-effective spoilage detection. Recent research employing copper nanoparticles, sensor arrays, and sustainable substrates such as sugarcane bagasse has shown their efficacy in detecting volatile chemicals, including hydrogen sulfide and trimethylamine (Abbas et al., 2025; Morsy et al., 2016; Teymouri and Shekarchizadeh, 2022). These sensors demonstrate elevated sensitivity with low detection thresholds and provide distinct visual signals for freshness indicators such as pH, TVB-N, and microbial proliferation (Abbas et al., 2025; Morsy et al., 2016; Teymouri and Shekarchizadeh, 2022). Their incorporation into intelligent packaging enables real-time quality evaluation, enhances food safety, and minimizes waste, underscoring substantial commercial potential.

5.3 Dairy products

Electrochemical sensors are revolutionizing dairy production by facilitating real-time monitoring and quality assurance across the supply chain. Biofilm detection in processing equipment is achieved via electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), which detects microbial colonization by measuring changes in electrical resistance, thereby reducing the risk of Listeria contamination (Chiriacò et al., 2018). An acoustic wave sensor enables real-time monitoring of milk coagulation by assessing frequency and equivalent circuit resistance fluctuations during curd formation, thereby improving rennet application and reducing cutting times for uniform cheese production (Pais et al., 2015). Semiconductor thin-film-based electronic noses simultaneously identify oxidative rancidity in milk powders by measuring VOCs (Capone et al., 2001).

The detection of antibiotic residues constitutes a vital application domain. Aliev et al. (2023) created an advanced multielectrode sensor system that integrates copper, nickel, and carbon fiber electrodes with machine learning algorithms to detect antibiotic residues in skimmed milk (Aliev et al., 2023). This pattern recognition system achieved high accuracy and can be incorporated into existing milking systems at dairy farms for ongoing monitoring. Monitoring of Heavy Metal Contamination has also experienced substantial advancement. Recent research has shown that electrochemical sensors can detect lead (II) and cadmium (II) in newborn milk powder using nanoporous carbon-modified screen-printed electrodes, with detection limits as low as 0.1 μg/L for lead (Chen H. et al., 2023). Moreover, sensors constructed from carbon felt have been engineered for the concurrent detection of cadmium, lead, and mercury in milk samples, exhibiting remarkable reproducibility and stability (Mo and Shen, 2024). Tuteja et al. (2017) introduce a novel electrochemical immunosensor for rapid, on-farm detection of NEFA and βHBA, key biomarkers for Negative Energy Balance in dairy cows, utilizing electro-reduced graphene oxide and specific antibodies.

Enzymatic biosensors have transformed the analysis of lactose. A study by Conzuelo et al. (2010) introduced an amperometric biosensor for detecting lactose in milk and dairy. The biosensor used β-galactosidase, glucose oxidase, peroxidase, and tetrathiafulvalene on a modified gold electrode. It measures lactose concentration through enzymatic reactions and electrochemical detection, showing good repeatability and reproducibility. Carbon nanotubes have been used to develop paper-based electrochemical biosensors for sustainable, economical lactose monitoring (de Brito et al., 2021). Comprehensive Quality Assessment was also achieved using portable potentiometric electronic tongues that can analyze milk with varying fat content and nutritional composition, effectively distinguishing between different milk types while forecasting physicochemical parameters typically us in quality control (Pérez-González et al., 2021).

5.4 Fruits and vegetables

Recent advancements have been focused on developing complex fruit freshness monitoring systems that integrate innovative data processing methods with electrochemical sensor arrays. One significant innovation is the development of gas-sensor-array-based electronic noses to predict apple freshness (Wang W. et al., 2023). These systems assess olfactory information released by apples during storage using neural network prediction models optimized with an enhanced Sparrow Search Algorithm (SSA) based on chaotic sequences. Ethylene, carbon dioxide, and ethanol are significant biomarkers for fruit freshness, and the device tracks variations in their concentrations (Wang S. H. et al., 2023; Wang W. et al., 2023). Microfluidic devices with electrochemical sensors are another innovation in freshness monitoring. These devices enable real-time monitoring of electrochemical changes during fruit aging, providing controlled conditions for sample assessment without external variables. Cyclic voltammetry (CV) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) have been used to analyze apples and oranges with higher sensitivity, faster analysis times, and reduced sample consumption than standard approaches (Rani, 2023).

Chemiresistive gas sensors paired with machine learning algorithms have shown exceptional promise for assessing fruit freshness(Mahata et al., 2023). Studies employing SnO₂ nanosheets produced by low-temperature hydrothermal methods have shown potential in monitoring the freshness levels of oranges, guavas, apples, and grapes. The neural network-based regression models used in these systems exhibited remarkable prediction accuracy, making them ideal for real-time fruit quality monitoring applications (Mahata et al., 2023). Warehouse gas sensor arrays can also detect ethylene, CO₂, VOCs, and O₂ to warn of apple spoilage. The integration of simulated annealing-partial least squares (SA-PLS) modelling achieved R = 0.936 and RMSEP = 0.828, demonstrating high predictive accuracy (Yin et al., 2023).

Electrochemical sensors excel in vitamin C analysis offers a linear range of 30–700 nM and a detection limit of 23 nM (Mohammadnezhad et al., 2024). Cyclic voltammetry on platinum disc electrodes delivers 0.1–10 mM linearity (R² = 0.9995, RSD = 1.14%) and 94–104% recovery in fruit juice analysis (Danet et al., 2009). Gelatin sulfonamide–modified sensors achieve dual ranges (0.2–5 ppb, 20–600 ppb) with 0.03 ppb detection and 0.11 ppb quantification limits for ascorbic acid determination, providing high selectivity, stability, and reproducibility in fruit juice and pharmaceutical assays (Magar et al., 2024). Using disposable single-walled carbon nanotube electrodes, voltammetric methods can monitor the amounts of flavanol and anthocyanins in the skins and seeds of Merlot, Tannat, and Syrah grapes as they ripen. Strong correlations between electrochemical parameters and DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP assays validated the efficacy of a thorough evaluation of varietal antioxidant ability (Benbouguerra et al., 2020).

Electrochemical biosensors offer key advantages for detecting pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables, enhancing food safety. Enzyme-based acetylcholinesterase sensors detected organophosphates at concentrations as low as 3.75 × 10⁻¹¹ M, with stability up to 33 days at 4 °C (Hara and Singh, 2021). Multi-enzyme platforms enable simultaneous detection of diverse pesticide classes (Hara and Singh, 2021). Cell-based biosensors using the Bioelectric Recognition Assay with membrane-engineered Vero cells and anti-boscalid antibodies detect boscalid residues in lettuce at levels near MRLs, delivering reliable, reproducible analysis and rapid, sensitive detection (Moschopoulou et al., 2024).

Novel food-based edible electrochemical sensors utilize food-grade conductive materials, corn and olive oils as binders, vegetable-derived biocatalysts, and food-grade packaging sleeves. The cited edible electrodes demonstrated well-defined voltammetric detection of catechol, uric acid, ascorbic acid, dopamine, and acetaminophen, with sensitive measurements reported in simulated saliva, gastric fluid, and intestinal fluid. Their sustainability advantage lies in the use of edible, biodegradable, and low-toxicity constituents, reducing dependence on conventional non-degradable electrode substrates. For food-quality monitoring, such platforms offer safer direct-contact sensing, lower disposal concerns, and better compatibility with sustainable intelligent packaging. However, long-term stability, analyte-specific calibration in real food matrices, and regulatory validation still require further investigation (Kim et al., 2017).

5.5 Grains and cereals

The incorporation of electrochemical sensing technologies in grain and cereal applications has seen significant advancements in recent years. The detection of aflatoxins, especially aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), is a crucial application of electrochemical sensors in grain safety monitoring. A significant advancement has been made with the development of screen-printed carbon electrodes enhanced with molybdenum disulfide quantum dots and zirconium-based metal–organic frameworks, achieving detection limits as low as 0.06 ng/mL for AFB1 and a linear range of 0.2 to 10 ng/mL. This performance notably exceeds regulatory standards and facilitates the early detection of contamination across different grain matrices (Kaur et al., 2022). Handheld biosensors that are field-deployable and utilize sulfuric acid–pretreated, BSA-modified screen-printed electrodes are capable of detecting AFB1 on-site with a sensitivity of 2.058 ng/mL within the range of 1–20 ng/mL. Enhanced surface area, biocompatibility, and efficient antibody immobilization are the benefits of advanced immunosensors that utilize chitosan–graphene nanosheet composites. These sensors accomplish linear detection from 0.05 to 25 ng/mL with a 0.021 ng/mL limit and 97.3–101.4% recovery (Zhang et al., 2024).

Label-free electrochemical immunosensors can identify aflatoxin B1 and ochratoxin A utilizing polyclonal antibodies on screen-printed carbon electrodes modified with gold nanoparticles and polyaniline. They attained R² values of 0.9935 for AFB1 and 0.9962 for OTA, with limits of detection ranging from 0.6 to 0.87 ppb in buffer and from 1.81 to 3.18 ppb in grain matrices, and were satisfactorily confirmed by PLC (Zhang et al., 2024). The detection of organophosphorus pesticides in grain systems has advanced significantly with the development of novel metal oxide-based electrochemical sensors. Electrochemical sensors based on novel metal oxides, utilizing porous 3D flower-like neodymium molybdate electrodes, detect methyl parathion over the concentration range of 0.5–300 μM, withxceptional electrocatalytic sensitivity and selectivity (Maheshwaran et al., 2024). Molecularly imprinted polymer electrochemical sensors for carbofuran display extensive linearity ranging from 5 × 10⁻⁸ to 4 × 10⁻⁴ M, with a detection limit of 2.4 × 10⁻⁸ M. These sensors utilize gold nanoparticles for signal amplification and exhibit remarkable selectivity and validated efficacy in actual vegetable and grain samples. These advancements exceed traditional materials and facilitate agricultural monitoring (Qi et al., 2018).

The advancement of eco-friendly sensing platforms has drawn significant interest in recent years. Natural fiber-based SugarcaneSens sensors on sugarcane skin substrates exhibit performance equivalent to ceramic and PET sensors, with a roughness factor of approximately 8, and can detect glucose (1–2000 μM) and cadmium (1–1,000 nM), while significantly minimizing environmental impact (Gokhale et al., 2024). Recent advancements in electrochemical sensors improve metal detection and selectivity in grains. A study by Hamid Kargari et al. (2023) proved that polymer systems integrating polyaniline and poly (diallyldimethylammonium chloride) with acrylic acid-functionalized graphene oxide nanosheets attained a sensitivity of 1.79 A/M and detection limits of 0.12 μM for inorganic arsenic. The collaborative design enhanced surface area, adsorption capacity, and charge transfer efficiency.

5.6 Beverages

Electrochemical sensors have revolutionized beverage analysis by providing portable, real-time monitoring of quality and safety. In wine analysis, TiO₂ nanoparticle-enhanced carbon paste electrodes increased the sensitivity for gallic acid by 2-fold and improved catechin detection by 1.5-fold. Distinct electrochemical signatures were observed; such as, Vranac and Cabernet Sauvignon exhibit 2.5-fold signal enhancements, Merlot displays a 1.5-fold rise, and Graševina also shows a 1.5-fold increase, while Chardonnay demonstrated no variation. These advancements provided precise authentication and thorough quality evaluation (Mićin et al., 2024). Another study has enhanced wine stability and quality control by elucidating oxidative pathways and developing selective sensors. Research indicated that polyphenols such as protocatechuic acid, caffeic acid, epicatechin, and rutin were oxidized to quinones through a two-electron, two-proton process. These quinones subsequently formed mono- and bis-glutathione conjugates, which were characterized by UHPLC–MS, thereby enhancing understanding of antioxidant interactions and predictions of shelf-life (Newair et al., 2023). Ibáñez et al. (2022) developed another novel Spectro electrochemical enzyme sensor, which utilized a dual-enzyme configuration for the selective detection of acetaldehyde in white and rosé wines. This approach integrated optical and electrochemical signals to circumvent polyphenol interference, with fluorometric validation demonstrating its accuracy and reliability in complex matrices.

Electrochemical sensors have improved coffee quality control, facilitating accurate methylxanthine profiling and extensive chemical evaluation. Carbon-dot systems can simultaneously measure caffeine and theophylline with detection limits reaching 1 × 10⁻⁶ mol L⁻¹ for both compounds (Di Matteo et al., 2023). Advanced electrodes—glassy carbon modified with graphene–zirconia nanocomposites and ZnCo₂O₄/Pt exhibited improved current responses and selectivity in detecting caffeine (Tasić et al., 2022). Disposable Cu-MOF@f-MWCNT sensors provided linear detection of caffeine over 0.01–1.50 mM (LOD 7.9 μM) with recoveries of 85–4.6% in black coffee (Saraban et al., 2024). Innovative electrochemical methods also provided rapid and economical profiling of chlorogenic acid and antioxidants, supplanting laborious chromatographic techniques (Munteanu and Apetrei, 2021).

Screen-printed biosensors on paper provided cost-effective, incinerable ethanol analysis in beer. The ethanol detection method utilized a nanocomposite of Carbon Black and Prussian Blue nanoparticles (CB/PBNPs) as an electrocatalyst to identify hydrogen peroxide produced by the enzymatic interaction between alcohol oxidase and ethanol. It quantified up to 10 mM ethanol (0.058% vol), with a sensitivity of 9.13 μA/mM·cm² and a detection limit of 0.52 mM. Validation of Pilsner, Weiss, Lager, and alcohol-free beers affirmed their reliability and applicability (Cinti et al., 2017).

Electrochemical sensors combined with chemometric analysis facilitated rapid, cost-effective fruit juice authentication and safety assessment. Electrochemical fingerprinting, in conjunction with PLS-DA, detected grapefruit adulteration in orange juice at concentrations as low as 1%. In contrast, PCA distinguished apple, orange, and grape juices according to their polyphenolic profiles (Monago-Maraña et al., 2024). CNT–Fe₃O₄ nanocomposite biosensors demonstrated exceptional sensitivity (527 μA mg L⁻¹ cm⁻²), a low detection limit (0.05 mg L⁻¹), and high precision (RSD < 1.79%) for formaldehyde in orange juice, achieving recoveries above 90% in actual samples (Kundu et al., 2019). These methods provided scalable solutions for industrial and regulatory bodies.

Electrochemical biosensors currently provide exceptional detection of pathogens and contaminants in beverages. Ultra-sensitive electrochemiluminescence sensors with nitrogen-modified carbon dots can detect E. coli at concentrations up to 1 CFU/mL within 1our of pre-enrichment (Wang et al., 2022). Bacteriophage-integrated systems enhance specificity and accelerate on-site testing (Wang et al., 2022). Simultaneously, Bi₂S₃/CNF nanocomposite sensors can accurately measure chemical contaminants, including caffeic acid, with concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 500 μM and a detection limit of 108 nM, thereby facilitating stable and selective juice analysis.

6 Recent advances and integration with smart packaging and IoT

Recent advancements in smart packaging have transitioned the domain from passive labels and singular indications to fully interconnected, data-driven systems that integrate the product, supply chain, and customer. Significant advancements are concentrated in four domains, such as miniaturized, low-power sensors; wireless data transmission and automatic identification and data capture (RFID/NFC/QR); edge and cloud analytics (AI/ML); and reliable traceability frameworks (blockchain/ledgers). Collectively, they provide ongoing, actionable surveillance of product condition (temperature, gases, microbial metabolites), origin, and user interaction (Mkhari et al., 2025). Sensor technology has evolved to be more efficient and cost-effective. Flexible printed electrochemical gas sensors and NFC/RFID-enabled smart labels are increasingly being explored for detecting spoilage-related gases such as volatile amines and CO₂. In passive NFC/RFID formats, the signal can be read on demand using a smartphone or reader, whereas active wireless labels can support continuous data transmission when coupled with an appropriate power source. Recent examples include disposable NFC-enabled gas sensors that can be read by smartphones and coupled with online dashboards, offering a viable pathway to broad consumer adoption. Biosensors, both electrochemical and enzymatic, designed for food matrices are concurrently being miniaturized for in-pack use, facilitating early detection of contamination or biochemical deterioration (Sobhan et al., 2025; Naik et al., 2024). Connectivity and data processing have progressed together. Edge computing on smart labels or compact gateways reduces data transmission to the cloud and enables real-time notifications and local actuation (e.g., activated vents, color-changing indicators). Machine learning algorithms for sensor fusion—integrating temperature, humidity, motion, and gas signatures—now provide predictive shelf-life predictions and anomaly detection beyond mere threshold methods, thereby enhancing the accuracy of use-by recommendations and minimizing waste. The use of AI in packaging systems facilitates automatic quality assessment across distribution nodes (Dhal and Kar, 2025).

7 Industrial adoption of biosensors in food safety

Manufacturers are increasingly turning to biosensors for in-situ safety monitoring due to their ability to rapidly detect pathogens, toxins, and allergens, thereby reducing product holds and minimizing product waste. They are increasingly replacing slow laboratory tests with in-line or at-line tests for faster screening. Among biosensor types, electrochemical biosensors have found significant industrial relevance, especially in wet-process industries, where enzymatic electrodes and amperometric probes have been employed to detect Salmonella and E. coli in poultry wash water and to detect sugars or acids in fermenting vats (Risalvato et al., 2025). Therefore, these biosensors have found significant use in the fast analysis of microorganisms and metabolites. On the other hand, optical biosensors have also found significant industrial relevance, especially in the form of surface plasmon resonance-based biosensors. Such devices have found significant use in the fast analysis of biological samples. In fact, the handheld SPR reader, MOLOKO, has been widely used for on-site screening of milk samples for antibiotics and toxins (Olaifa and Ikusika, 2025). In addition, immunoassay-based biosensors have found significant relevance for the rapid analysis of biological samples. Such devices have found significant use in the fast screening of food samples for allergens and toxins. More advanced electrochemical immunosensors have also found significant use in the fast analysis of biological samples, hence providing ELISA sensitivities in much shorter assay times (Wang et al., 2022).

In the United States, sensor-integrated packaging components that contact food are generally regulated within the FDA food-contact-substance framework. The FDA defines a food contact substance as a substance that contacts food but is not intended to have a technical effect in the food itself, and such substances must be authorized for marketing as food additives, usually through a Food Contact Notification. FDA review includes migration assessment, toxicological evaluation, and environmental review. At the same time, ingredient status may also be derived from 21 CFR listings, GRAS status, prior sanction, FCN, or a Threshold of Regulation exemption (FDA, 2021). In the European Union, food-contact materials must comply with Framework Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 and Good Manufacturing Practice Regulation (EC) No 2023/2006, while active and intelligent food-contact materials are specifically governed by Regulation (EC) No 450/2009. EFSA defines intelligent materials as systems that monitor the condition of packaged food or its environment, such as freshness or temperature, and evaluate them using migration and toxicological data (EFSA, 2009).

From an industrial-translation perspective, electrochemical biosensors should be evaluated through a technology-readiness pathway. Most published food-spoilage biosensors remain at laboratory proof-of-concept or food-matrix validation stages, while fewer systems have reached pilot packaging integration, in-line factory testing, or commercial deployment. Progression toward higher readiness requires reproducible electrode manufacturing, batch-to-batch calibration, validated cleaning or disposable-use protocols, anti-fouling performance in real foods, stability during storage and distribution, and compatibility with HACCP, traceability, and quality-assurance workflows. For intelligent packaging, additional requirements include migration safety, food-contact approval, consumer-readable outputs, data security for IoT-connected systems, and clear decision thresholds that distinguish fresh, acceptable, and spoiled states. Therefore, regulatory approval and industrial adoption depend not only on low LOD values, but also on robustness, repeatability, user safety, cost per test, and evidence from pilot-scale or real supply-chain trials.

8 Challenges, future perspectives, and research gaps

Sensor fouling in real-time electrochemical biosensors occurs due to protein adsorption, microbial biofilm formation, and accumulation of organic residues, leading to signal drift and reduced sensitivity. Addressing fouling is critical for reliable early detection of food spoilage and maintaining sensor accuracy during continuous food quality monitoring (Li et al., 2019). Additionally, the stability of biorecognition elements in real-time electrochemical biosensors is challenged by temperature fluctuations, pH changes, and enzymatic degradation, leading to reduced binding efficiency and a shorter sensor lifespan. Enhancing stability through immobilization techniques and protective matrices is essential for reliable early-warning detection of food spoilage (D'Orazio, 2011). In the European Union, sensors (e.g., MVOC) fall under the category of “active and intelligent” food contact materials, regulated by the Framework Regulation (EC) 1935/2004 and specific Commission Regulations (EC) 450/2009 and (EU) 2019/1381. These mandate that sensor components must not emit hazardous compounds or modify food composition or sensory characteristics. Noncontact components, such as those behind functional barriers, are subject to a migration limit of 0.01 mg/kg. However, the overall migration limit (OML) of 60 mg/kg for food applies unless otherwise exempted. Validation and standardization are needed to shift lab prototypes to regulatory approval. There are no defined measurements or test methodologies for VOC-based spoiling sensors. Research groups and companies typically utilize their own protocols to claim that sensors detect rotting “X hours early” or correlate with analyte concentrations. Regulators and business groups are seeking reference approaches, such as standardizing spoiling scenarios and expressing sensor accuracy. For instance, characterizing a sensor’s performance in terms of its sensitivity (ppm) to a target VOC, specificity in the presence of interferents, response time, and false alarm rate under defined settings allows objective product comparison (Ramadan et al., 2025). Validation also pertains to economic feasibility, including costs and scalability. Regulators do not directly account for cost, whereas industry adoption does. A sensor that meets all technological specifications but costs $5 per package would face resistance among low-margin food products. Consequently, a component of validation, in a broader context, involves demonstrating that sensor systems can be manufactured at scale with uniform quality (adhering to ISO 9001 or other quality assurance standards) and at a price point acceptable to the market. Life-cycle analysis and end-of-life disposal are pertinent, certain intelligent packaging may qualify as an electronic device (if equipped with a chip or battery), prompting inquiries regarding recycling and environmental compliance (e.g., EU WEEE directives for electronic waste disposal). This indicates that designers are exploring entirely food-grade, biodegradable sensors that can be composted with the packaging to avoid regulatory complications in waste management (GLOPACK, 2021).

Future progress in real-time electrochemical biosensors for food spoilage will depend on solving different connected research gaps rather than only improving sensitivity. First, real-food validation must be strengthened. Many promising sensors are still evaluated in buffer, simplified extracts or artificially spiked samples; however, naturally spoiled foods contain proteins, fats, salts, acids, pigments and microbial biofilms that can suppress or distort electrochemical responses. Future studies should therefore compare biosensor outputs with standard microbiological counts, TVB-N, pH, HPLC/GC–MS or validated reference assays under realistic storage and supply-chain conditions. Second, antifouling and long-term stability remain central barriers. Protein adsorption, lipid deposition, microbial biofilm formation and enzyme degradation can cause signal drift during continuous monitoring. Improved immobilization chemistries, protective membranes, antifouling coatings, hydrogel matrices and self-calibration algorithms are needed to maintain signal stability during prolonged storage and repeated measurements. Third, future systems should move from single-analyte detection to multiplexed and multimodal monitoring. Food spoilage is rarely represented by one marker alone; for example, fish spoilage may involve histamine, trimethylamine, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, pH change and microbial load. Combining electrochemical signals with temperature, humidity, gas sensors, optical labels and machine-learning models can improve shelf-life prediction and reduce false alarms. Fourth, standardized performance reporting is required. Studies should consistently report LOD, linear range, response time, selectivity against interferents, matrix recovery, repeatability, reproducibility, operational stability, shelf life, cost and readiness level. Without common metrics, comparison among amperometric, potentiometric, impedimetric and voltammetric platforms remains difficult and industrial users cannot make evidence-based adoption decisions. Fifth, industrial and regulatory translation must be planned early. Sensor components intended for intelligent packaging should be assessed for food-contact safety, migration risk, toxicity, environmental burden and compatibility with recycling or composting systems. Low-cost, biodegradable and battery-free platforms are especially important for high-volume foods where expensive electronic labels are commercially unrealistic. Finally, future research should develop open datasets linking sensor signals with microbial growth, chemical spoilage indices and sensory rejection points across food matrices. Such datasets would enable robust AI-assisted interpretation, shelf-life modelling and harmonized validation. Addressing these gaps will shift electrochemical biosensors from sensitive laboratory devices to reliable early-warning tools for sustainable, digitalized and regulation-ready food safety systems.

9 Conclusion

The advancement of next-generation electrochemical biosensors offers an innovative approach to addressing global issues in food spoilage detection and safety surveillance. With growing demands for rapid, reliable, and real-time food quality assurance, electrochemical biosensors are emerging as a contemporary solution, offering great advantages over traditional methods. These biosensors are classified into various categories, such as amperometric, potentiometric, impedimetric, and voltammetric, and are employed for different food items, including meat, dairy, seafood, fruits, vegetables, cereals, and drinks. The addition of advanced biorecognition components, such as enzymes, antibodies, DNA aptamers and microbial components, has further enhanced the specificity and accuracy of these biosensors. Among various nano materials for electrode modifications, carbon-based nanomaterials, particularly graphene, reduced graphene oxide and carbon nanotubes, provide the broadest overall advantage when combined with noble-metal nanoparticles, metal oxides, metal–organic frameworks or conductive polymers. These materials improve conductivity, active surface area, electron-transfer rate, bioreceptor immobilization, flexibility and signal amplification. In addition to improving the efficacy of spoilage detection, these developments pave the way for intelligent packaging solutions that may wirelessly transmit data to smartphones or other devices, assuring continuous surveillance of food safety. Although these major advantages exist, challenges such as sensitivity, selectivity, affordability, stability, validation in real food matrices, and regulatory approval remain. Dealing with these challenges needs collaborative efforts among academics, industry stakeholders, and regulators to validate biosensor effectiveness in actual food matrices and ensure their commercial acceptability. The continuous development of electrochemical biosensors has significant potential to transform food safety standards, minimize food waste, and ensure public health, making them vital for the future of the food industry. The incorporation of them into intelligent systems will further revolutionize food safety procedures, aligning with global initiatives such as Food Safety 4.0 and advancing sustainable development goals.

References

• 1

  AbbasS. G.SheraziF.HayatM.ManzoorS.RazaN.AftabF.et al. (2025). Efficient determination of fish spoilage using colorimetric strips from sugarcane bagasse waste. Results Eng.25:104132. doi: 10.1016/j.rineng.2025.104132

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 2

  AlievT. A.BelyaevV. E.PomytkinaA. V.NesterovP. V.ShityakovS.SadovnichiiR. V.et al. (2023). Electrochemical sensor to detect antibiotics in Milk based on machine learning algorithms. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces15, 52010–52020. doi: 10.1021/acsami.3c12050,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 3

  AmbayeA. D.MamoM. D.ZigyalewY.MengistuW. M.Fito NureJ.MokraniT.et al. (2024). The development of carbon nanostructured biosensors for glucose detection to enhance healthcare services: a review. Front. Sens.5:1456669. doi: 10.3389/fsens.2024.1456669

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 4

  AmeerS.IbrahimH.YaseenM. U.KulsoomF.CintiS.SherM. (2023). Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy-based sensing of biofilms: a comprehensive review. Biosensors13:777. doi: 10.3390/bios13080777,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 5

  AshiqJ.SaeedU.LiZ.NawazM. H. (2024). Advances in meat spoilage detection: a review of methods involving 2D-based nanomaterials for detection of spoiled meat. J. Food Compos. Anal.132:106295. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2024.106295

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 6

  BancalariE.NevianiE.GattiM. (2024). Impedometric analysis applied to food microbiology. Curr. Opin. Food Sci.57:101152. doi: 10.1016/j.cofs.2024.101152

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 7

  BekhitA. E. D. A.GiteruS. G.HolmanB. W. B.HopkinsD. L. (2021). Total volatile basic nitrogen and trimethylamine in muscle foods: potential formation pathways and effects on human health. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.20, 3620–3666. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12764,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 8

  BenbouguerraN.RichardT.SaucierC.GarciaF. (2020). Voltammetric behavior, Flavanol and anthocyanin contents, and antioxidant capacity of grape skins and seeds during ripening (Vitis vinifera var. merlot, Tannat, and Syrah). Antioxidants9:800. doi: 10.3390/antiox9090800,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 9

  CaiW.YangY.MaJ.CaoJ.RenX.ZhaoB. (2023). Transamination of aromatic aldehydes to primary arylmethylamines. Org. Lett.25, 3876–3880. doi: 10.1021/acs.orglett.3c01234

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 10

  CaiR.ZhangS.ChenL.LiM.ZhangY.ZhouN. (2021). Self-assembled DNA nanoflowers triggered by a DNA walker for highly sensitive electrochemical detection of Staphylococcus aureus. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces13, 4905–4914. doi: 10.1021/acsami.0c22062,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 11

  CalabreseA.BattistoniP.CeylanS.ZeniL.CapoA.VarrialeA.et al. (2023). An impedimetric biosensor for detection of volatile organic compounds in food. Biosensors13:341. doi: 10.3390/bios13030341,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 12

  CalamT. T.ÇakıcıG. T. (2023). Optimization of square wave voltammetry parameters by response surface methodology for the determination of Sunset yellow using an electrochemical sensor based on Purpald®. Food Chemistry, 404:134412.

  • Google Scholar

• 13

  CaponeS.EpifaniM.QuarantaF.SicilianoP.TaurinoA.VasanelliL. (2001). Monitoring of rancidity of milk by means of an electronic nose and a dynamic PCA analysis. Sens. Actuators B Chem.78, 174–179. doi: 10.1016/s0925-4005(01)00809-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 14

  CesewskiE.JohnsonB. N. (2020). Electrochemical biosensors for pathogen detection. Biosens. Bioelectron.159:112214. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 15

  ChauhanS.ThakurA. (2023). Chitosan-based biosensors-a comprehensive review. Mater. Today Proc. doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.01.123,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 16

  ChenS.ChenX.SuH.GuoM.LiuH. (2023). Advances in synthetic-biology-based whole-cell biosensors: principles, genetic modules, and applications in food safety. Int. J. Mol. Sci.24:7989. doi: 10.3390/ijms24097989,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 17

  ChenH.SimoskaO.LimK.GrattieriM.YuanM.DongF.et al. (2020). Fundamentals, applications, and future directions of bioelectrocatalysis. Chem. Rev.120, 12903–12993. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00472,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 18

  ChenH.YaoY.ZhangC.PingJ. (2023). Determination of heavy metal ions in infant milk powder using a nanoporous carbon modified disposable sensor. Foods12:730. doi: 10.3390/foods12040730,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 19

  ChenJ.ZhaoZ.ZhuH.LiX. (2025). Advances in electrochemical biosensors for the detection of tumor-derived exosomes. Front. Chem.13:1556595. doi: 10.3389/fchem.2025.1556595,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 20

  ChiriacòM. S.ParlangeliI.SirsiF.PoltronieriP.PrimiceriE. (2018). Impedance sensing platform for detection of the food pathogen Listeria monocytogenes. Electronics7:347. doi: 10.3390/electronics7120347

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 21

  ChoulerJ.Di LorenzoM. (2019). Pesticide detection by a miniature microbial fuel cell under controlled operational disturbances. Water Sci. Technol.79, 2231–2241. doi: 10.2166/wst.2019.207,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 22

  CintiS.BassoM.MosconeD.ArduiniF. (2017). A paper-based nanomodified electrochemical biosensor for ethanol detection in beers. Anal. Chim. Acta960, 123–130. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2017.01.010,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 23

  ConzueloF.GamellaM.CampuzanoS.RuizM. A.ReviejoA. J.PingarrónJ. M. (2010). An integrated amperometric biosensor for the determination of lactose in milk and dairy products. J. Agric. Food Chem.58, 7141–7148. doi: 10.1021/jf101173e,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 24

  DanetA. F.PisoschiA. M.KalinowskiS. (2009). Ascorbic acid determination in commercial fruit juice samples by cyclic voltammetry. J. Autom. Methods Manag. Chem.2008:937651. doi: 10.1155/2008/937651,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 25

  de BritoA. R.JesusR. S.TavaresI. M.SilvaF. N.SantanaN. B.Barbosa FerrãoS. P.et al. (2021). Application of the electrochemical biosensor in the detection of lactose in skimmed milk. Surf. Interfaces22:100839. doi: 10.1016/j.surfin.2020.100839,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 26

  DhalS. B.KarD. (2025). Leveraging artificial intelligence and advanced food processing techniques for enhanced food safety, quality, and security: a comprehensive review. Discover Appl. Sci.7:75. doi: 10.1007/s42452-025-06472-w

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 27

  Di MatteoP.TraniA.BortolamiM.FerociM.PetrucciR.CurulliA. (2023). Electrochemical sensing platform based on carbon dots for the simultaneous determination of theophylline and caffeine in tea. Sensors23:7731. doi: 10.3390/s23187731,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 28

  D'OrazioP. (2011). Biosensors in clinical chemistry—2011 update. Clin. Chim. Acta412, 1749–1761. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2011.06.025,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 29

  DrazM. E.DarwishH. W.DarwishI. A.SaadA. S. (2021). Solid-state potentiometric sensor for the rapid assay of the biologically active biogenic amine (tyramine) as a marker of food spoilage. Food Chem.346:128911. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128911

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 30

  ErnaK. H.RovinaK.MantihalS. (2021). Current detection techniques for monitoring the freshness of meat-based products: a review. J. Packag. Technol. Res.5, 127–141. doi: 10.1007/s41783-021-00120-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 31

  EFSA (2009). Guidelines on submission of a dossier for safety evaluation by the EFSA of active or intelligent substances present in active and intelligent materials and articles intended to come into contact with food. EFSA J.7:1208. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1208

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 32

  FatahM. A. A.Abd El-MoghnyM. G.El-DeabM. S.El NasharR. M. (2023). Application of molecularly imprinted electrochemical sensor for trace analysis of Metribuzin herbicide in food samples. Food Chemistry, 404:134708.

  • Google Scholar

• 33

  FDA (2021). Inventory of Food Contact Substances Listed in 21 CFR. Available online at: https://www.fda.gov/food/packaging-food-contact-substances-fcs/inventory-food-contact-substances-listed-21-cfr (Accessed March 19, 2026).

  • Google Scholar

• 34

  FoddaiA. C. G.GrantI. R. (2020). Methods for detection of viable foodborne pathogens: current state-of-art and future prospects. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.104, 4281–4288. doi: 10.1007/s00253-020-10542-x,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 35

  FunariR.ShenA. Q. (2022). Detection and characterization of bacterial biofilms and biofilm-based sensors. ACS Sens.7, 347–357. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.1c02722

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 36

  Gama CavalcanteA. L.DariD. N.da Izaias Silva AiresF.de Carlos CastroE.Moreira SantosK.Sousa SantosJ. C. (2024). Advancements in enzyme immobilization on magnetic nanomaterials: toward sustainable industrial applications. RSC Adv.14, 17946–17988. doi: 10.1039/D4RA02939A,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 37

  Garcia-CruzA.AhmadO. S.AlanaziK.PiletskaE.PiletskyS. A. (2020). Generic sensor platform based on electro-responsive molecularly imprinted polymer nanoparticles (e-NanoMIPs). Microsyst. Nanoeng.6, 1–9. doi: 10.1038/s41378-020-00193-3,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 38

  GeletaG. S. (2023). A colorimetric aptasensor based on two-dimensional (2D) nanomaterial and gold nanoparticles for detection of toxic heavy metal ions: a review. Food Chem. Adv.2:100184. doi: 10.1016/j.focha.2023.100184

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 39

  Ghanei Agh KaarizD.DarabiE.ElahiS. M. (2020). Fabrication of au/ZnO/MWCNTs electrode and its characterization for electrochemical cholesterol biosensor. J. Theor. Appl. Phys.14, 339–348. doi: 10.1007/s40094-020-00390-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 40

  GLOPACK (2021). Position Paper on Barriers of Market Introduction of Active and Intelligent Packaging. 2021. https://circulareconomy.europa.eu/platform/sites/default/files/glopack_position-paper_aip_211015_kzs.pdf (Accessed April 5, 2025).

  • Google Scholar

• 41

  GokhaleN. A.Rao VusaC. S.PandaS. (2024). A natural fibre based sustainable and high-performance platform for electrochemical sensors. RSC Sustain.2, 1849–1858. doi: 10.1039/D4SU00059E

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 42

  GongL.LiangJ.ZhangY.ZhangM.AoH.YangT. (2024). An antifouling electrochemical biosensor using self-signal for Salmonella typhimurium direct detection in food sample. Food Chem.452:139536. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.139536,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 43

  GuoX.WangX.TianC.DaiJ.ZhaoZ.DuanY. (2023). Development of mass spectrometry imaging techniques and its latest applications. Talanta264:124721. doi: 10.1016/j.talanta.2023.124721,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 44

  GuoA.ZhangY.JiangM.ChenL.JiangX.ZouX.et al. (2025). Aptasensors for rapid detection of hazards in food: latest developments and trends. Biosensors15:629. doi: 10.3390/bios15090629,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 45

  GuptaN.KumarD.DasA.SoodS.MalhotraB. D. (2023). Conductive ink-coated paper-based supersandwich DNA biosensor for ultrasensitive detection of Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Biosensors13:486. doi: 10.3390/bios13040486,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 46

  HaghighianN.KatakyR. (2024). Advances in electrochemical detection of bacterial biofilm metabolites. Curr. Opin. Electrochem.46:101486. doi: 10.1016/j.coelec.2024.101486,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 47

  Hamid KargariS.AhourF.MahmoudianM. (2023). An electrochemical sensor for the detection of arsenic using nanocomposite-modified electrode. Sci. Rep.13, 1–13. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-36103-6,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 48

  HaraT. O.SinghB. (2021). Electrochemical biosensors for detection of pesticides and heavy metal toxicants in water: recent trends and progress. ACS Environ. Sci. Technol. Water1, 462–478. doi: 10.1021/acsestwater.0c00125

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 49

  HassanA. H. A.BerguaJ. F.Morales-NarváezE.MekoçiA. (2019). Validity of a single antibody-based lateral flow immunoassay depending on graphene oxide for highly sensitive determination of E. coli O157:H7 in minced beef and river water. Food Chem.297:124965. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.124965

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 50

  HeY.JiaF.SunY.FangW.LiY.ChenJ.et al. (2022). An electrochemical sensing method based on CRISPR/Cas12a system and hairpin DNA probe for rapid and sensitive detection of Salmonella Typhimurium. Sens. Actuators B Chem.369:132301. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2022.132301

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 51

  HosseinikebriaS.KhazaeiM.DervisevicM.JudicpaM. A.TianJ.RazalJ. M.et al. (2025). Electrochemical biosensors: the beacon for food safety and quality. Food Chem.475:143284. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2025.143284,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 52

  IbáñezD.González-GarcíaM. B.Hernández-SantosD.Fanjul-BoladoP. (2022). Spectroelectrochemical enzyme sensor system for acetaldehyde detection in wine. Biosensors12:1032. doi: 10.3390/bios12111032,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 53

  InêsA.CosmeF. (2025). Biosensors for detecting food contaminants—an overview. PRO13:380. doi: 10.3390/pr13020380

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 54

  IstrateO. M.RotariuL.BalaC. (2021). Amperometric L-lactate biosensor based upon a gold nanoparticles/reduced graphene oxide/polyallylamine hydrochloride modified screen-printed graphite electrode. Chem9:74. doi: 10.3390/chemosensors9040074

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 55

  JiaF.LiB.HeY.ShenY.ChenJ.LiX.et al. (2023). An amplification-free CRISPR-SERS biosensor for specific, sensitive and rapid detection of Salmonella Typhimurium in poultry. LWT189:115476. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2023.115476

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 56

  JiangH.WuQ.ZhaoQ.LiuK.BoQ.QinX.et al. (2023). Using dCas9 as an intermediate bridge of loop-mediated isothermal amplification-based lateral flow colorimetric biosensor for point-of-care Salmonella detection. Sens. Actuators B Chem.396:134581. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2023.134581

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 57

  KabirazM. P.MajumdarP. R.MahmudM. M. C.BhowmikS.AliA. (2023). Conventional and advanced detection techniques of foodborne pathogens: a comprehensive review. Heliyon9:e15482. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e15482,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 58

  KanL.ZhaoW.LiuM.PanW.LiD.ZhaoY.et al. (2025). Ratiometric SERS sensor for sensitive quantification of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus using Ti3C2@AuNP films and aptamer-based tags. Appl. Surf. Sci.690:162639. doi: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2025.162639

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 59

  KangM.HuangS.WangM.OderindeO.WangM.ZhangZ. (2023). Defective zirconium/titanium bimetallic metal–organic framework as a highly selective and sensitive electrochemical aptasensor for deoxynivalenol determination in foodstuffs. Microchim. Acta190, 1–11. doi: 10.1007/s00604-023-05935-4,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 60

  KannanS. K.AmbroseB.SudalaimaniS.PandiarajM.GiribabuK.KathiresanM. (2020). A review on chemical and electrochemical methodologies for the sensing of biogenic amines. Anal. Methods12, 3438–3453. doi: 10.1039/d0ay00358a,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 61

  KarmakarS.PoudyalD.MishraK. K.DhamuV. N.MuthukumarS.PrasadS. (2025). Label-free electrochemical biosensor for real-time detection of live Salmonella typhimurium in salad samples using non-faradaic EIS. Biosens. Bioelectron.290:117961. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2025.117961,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 62

  KashyapS.TehriN.VermaN.GahlautA.HoodaV. (2022). Recent advances in development of electrochemical biosensors for the detection of biogenic amines. 3 Biotech13:2. doi: 10.1007/s13205-022-03414-w,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 63

  KaurG.SharmaS.SinghS.BhardwajN.DeepA. (2022). Selective and sensitive electrochemical sensor for aflatoxin M1 with a molybdenum disulfide quantum dot/metal-organic framework nanocomposite. ACS Omega7, 17600–17608. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.2c00126,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 64

  KhalequeM. A.HossainS. I.AliM. R.Aly Saad AlyM.AbuelmakaremH. S.Al MamunM. S.et al. (2024). Bioreceptor modified electrochemical biosensors for the detection of life threating pathogenic bacteria: a review. RSC Adv.14, 28487–28515. doi: 10.1039/d4ra04038d,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 65

  KimJ.JeerapanI.CiuiB.HartelM. C.MartinA.WangJ. (2017). Edible electrochemistry: food materials based electrochemical sensors. Adv. Healthc. Mater.6:770. doi: 10.1002/adhm.201700770,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 66

  KimS. R.LeeS.KimJ.KimE.KilH. J.YooJ. H.et al. (2022). A fabric-based multifunctional sensor for the early detection of skin decubitus ulcers. Biosens. Bioelectron.215:114555. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114555,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 67

  KlevinskasA.KantminienėK.ŽmuidzinavičienėN.JonuškienėI.GriškonisE. (2021). Microbial fuel cell as a bioelectrochemical sensor of nitrite ions. PRO9:1330. doi: 10.3390/pr9081330

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 68

  Koçoǧluİ. O.ErdenP. E.KiliçE. (2020). Disposable biogenic amine biosensors for histamine determination in fish. Anal. Methods12, 3802–3812. doi: 10.1039/D0AY00802H,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 69

  KouhiI.Parvizi FardG.AlipourE.SaadatiradA. (2022). Development of an electrochemical sensor for determination of vanillin in some food stuffs. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 46:e16289.

  • Google Scholar

• 70

  KumarH.BhardwajK.KaurT.NepovimovaE.KučaK.KumarV.et al. (2020). Detection of bacterial pathogens and antibiotic residues in chicken meat: a review. Foods9:1504. doi: 10.3390/foods9101504,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 71

  KumarH.GuleriaS.SethiN.CimlerR.PatheraA. K.DhanjalD. S.et al. (2025). Enhancing meat safety and quality: innovations in protein-based sensing technologies for contaminant detection. Food Control173:111208. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2025.111208

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 72

  KunduM.BhardwajH.PandeyM. K.KrishnanP.KotnalaR. K.SumanaG. (2019). Development of electrochemical biosensor based on CNT–Fe3O4 nanocomposite to determine formaldehyde adulteration in orange juice. J. Food Sci. Technol.56:1829. doi: 10.1007/s13197-019-03635-7,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 73

  KuulialaL.AbatihE.IoannidisA. G.VanderroostM.De MeulenaerB.RagaertP.et al. (2018). Multivariate statistical analysis for the identification of potential seafood spoilage indicators. Food Control84, 49–60. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2017.07.018

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 74

  LéguillierV.HeddiB.VidicJ. (2024). Recent advances in aptamer-based biosensors for bacterial detection. Biosensors14:210. doi: 10.3390/bios14050210,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 75

  LiL.WangT.ZhongY.LiR.DengW.XiaoX.et al. (2024). A review of nanomaterials for biosensing applications. J. Mater. Chem. B12, 1168–1193. doi: 10.1039/d3tb02648e

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 76

  LiF.YuZ.HanX.LaiR. Y. (2019). Electrochemical aptamer-based sensors for food and water analysis: a review. Anal. Chim. Acta1051, 1–23. doi: 10.1016/j.aca.2018.10.058,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 77

  LiZ.ZhangX.QiH.HuangX.ShiJ.ZouX. (2022). A novel renewable electrochemical biosensor based on mussel-inspired adhesive protein for the detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in food. Sens. Actuators B Chem.372:132601. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2022.132601

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 78

  LinX.LiuC.LeiQ.NanX.ZhuY.LiaoJ.et al. (2025). A novel ratiometric electrochemical aptasensor based on graphene quantum dots/cu-MOF nanocomposite for the on-site determination of Staphylococcus aureus. J. Hazard. Mater.485:136845. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.136845,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 79

  LinX.LiuP. P.YanJ.LuanD.SunT.BianX. (2023). Dual synthetic receptor-based sandwich electrochemical sensor for highly selective and ultrasensitive detection of pathogenic bacteria at the single-cell level. Anal. Chem.95, 5561–5567. doi: 10.1021/acs.analchem.2c04657

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 80

  LipińskaW.SiuzdakK.KarczewskiJ.DołęgaA.GrochowskaK. (2021). Electrochemical glucose sensor based on the glucose oxidase entrapped in chitosan immobilized onto laser-processed au-Ti electrode. Sens. Actuators B Chem.330:129409. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2020.129409

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 81

  LiuR.HarunaS. A.AliS.XuJ.ZhangY.LüP.et al. (2022). A sensitive and accurate fluorescent genosensor for Staphylococcus aureus detection. Sens. Actuators B Chem.355:131311. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2021.131311

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 82

  LiuR.ZhangY.AliS.HarunaS. A.HeP.LiH.et al. (2021). Development of a fluorescence aptasensor for rapid and sensitive detection of Listeria monocytogenes in food. Food Control122:107808. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2020.107808

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 83

  Lopez-TellezJ.Ramirez-MontesS.FerreiraT. A.SantosE. M.RodriguezJ. A. (2022). Application of voltammetric sensors for pathogen bacteria detection: a review. Chem10:424. doi: 10.3390/chemosensors10100424

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 84

  MagarH. S.FahimA. M.HashemM. S. (2024). Accurate, affordable, and easy electrochemical detection of ascorbic acid in fresh fruit juices and pharmaceutical samples using an electroactive gelatin sulfonamide. RSC Adv.14, 39820–39832. doi: 10.1039/d4ra06271j,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 85

  MahariS.RobertsA.Chemistry, S. G.-F., & 2022, U (2022). Probe-free nanosensor for the detection of Salmonella using gold nanorods as an electroactive modulator. Food Chem.390:133219. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.133219,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 86

  MahataB.AcharyyaS.GiriS.MahataT.BanerjiP.GuhaP. K. (2023). Fruit freshness monitoring employing chemiresistive volatile organic compound sensor and machine learning. ACS Appl. Nano Mater.6, 22829–22836. doi: 10.1021/acsanm.3c04138

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 87

  MaheshwaranS.ChenW.-H.LinS.-L.GhorbaniM.HoangA. T. (2024). Metal oxide-based electrochemical sensors for pesticide detection in water and food samples: a review.Environmental Science: Advances, Royal Society of Chemistry. 3, 154–176.

  • Google Scholar

• 88

  MahtabT.DeenM. J. (2022). Green approach using RuO2/GO nanocomposite for low cost and highly sensitive pH sensing. J. Electrochem. Soc.169:047501. doi: 10.1149/1945-7111/ac5f1f

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 89

  Majer-BaranyiK.SzékácsA.AdányiN. (2023). Application of electrochemical biosensors for determination of food spoilage. Biosensors13:456. doi: 10.3390/bios13040456,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 90

  MalikS.SinghJ.GoyatR.SaharanY.ChaudhryV.UmarA.et al. (2023). Nanomaterials-based biosensor and their applications: a review. Heliyon9:e19929. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19929,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 91

  MarezeJ.Ramos-PereiraJ.SantosJ. A.BelotiV.López-DíazT. M. (2022). Identification and characterisation of lactobacilli isolated from an artisanal cheese with antifungal and antibacterial activity against cheese spoilage and mycotoxigenic Penicillium spp. Int. Dairy J.130:105367. doi: 10.1016/j.idairyj.2022.105367

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 92

  MassagliaG.SpisniG.PirriC. F.QuaglioM. (2023). Microbial fuel cells as effective tools for energy recovery and antibiotic detection in water and food. Micromachines14:2137. doi: 10.3390/mi14122137,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 93

  MelinteG.HosuO.CristeaC.MarrazzaG. (2023). Ara H1 peanut allergen detection using a labelled electrochemical aptasensor based on GO-COOH@bimetallic composite platform. Food Chem.400:134074. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.134074,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 94

  MengR.ZhuQ.LongT.HeX.LuoZ.GuR.et al. (2023). The innovative and accurate detection of heavy metals in foods: a critical review on electrochemical sensors. Food Control150:109743. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2023.109743

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 95

  MićinS.DeNardisN. I.MartinezS.ŠpadaV.MalinovićB. N. (2024). Characterization of wine polyphenols with a carbon/nanoparticle TiO2 electrode: original scientific paper. J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng.14, 583–599. doi: 10.5599/jese.2395

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 96

  MkhariT.AdeyemiJ. O.FawoleO. A. (2025). Recent advances in the fabrication of intelligent packaging for food preservation: a review. PRO13:539. doi: 10.3390/pr13020539

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 97

  MoY.ShenY. (2024). Electrochemical detection of heavy metals in rice, milk and tap water using free-standing carbon felt electrodes. Food Chem.460:140450. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.140450,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 98

  MogaA.Vergara-BarberánM.Lerma-GarcíaM. J.Carrasco-CorreaE. J.Herrero-MartínezJ. M.Simó-AlfonsoE. F. (2021). Determination of antibiotics in meat samples using analytical methodologies: a review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.20, 1681–1716. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12702,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 99

  MohammadA. M.ChowdhuryT.BiswasB.AbsarN. (2018). “Food poisoning and intoxication: A global leading concern for human health,” In Food safety and preservation. Academic Press.307–352.

  • Google Scholar

• 100

  MohammadnezhadK.AhourF.KeshipourS. (2024). Electrochemical determination of ascorbic acid using palladium supported on N-doped graphene quantum dot modified electrode. Sci. Rep.14, 1–10. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-56231-x,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 101

  Mohammad-RazdariA.Ghasemi-VarnamkhastiM.IzadiZ.RostamiS.EnsafiA. A.SiadatM.et al. (2019). Detection of sulfadimethoxine in meat samples using a novel electrochemical biosensor as a rapid analysis method. J. Food Compos. Anal.82:103252. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2019.103252

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 102

  Monago-MarañaO.Zapardiel PalenzuelaA.CrevillénA. G. (2024). Untargeted authentication of fruit juices based on electrochemical fingerprints combined with chemometrics. Adulteration of orange juice as case of study. LWT209:797. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2024.116797

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 103

  MonošíkR.StreďanskýM.GreifG.ŠturdíkE. (2012). A rapid method for determination of L-lactic acid in real samples by amperometric biosensor utilizing nanocomposite. Food Control23, 238–244. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2011.07.021

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 104

  MoraskieM.RoshidM. H. O.O’ConnorG.DikiciE.ZinggJ. M.DeoS.et al. (2021). Microbial whole-cell biosensors: current applications, challenges, and future perspectives. Biosens. Bioelectron.191:113359. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2021.113359,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 105

  MorenoI.LipováP.LaderoL.Fernández-GarcíaJ. L.CavaR. (2020). Glycogen and lactate contents, pH and meat quality and gene expression in muscle longissimus dorsi from iberian pigs under different rearing conditions. Livest. Sci.240:104167. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2020.104167

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 106

  MorsyM. K.ZórK.KosteshaN.AlstrømT. S.HeiskanenA.El-TanahiH.et al. (2016). Development and validation of a colorimetric sensor array for fish spoilage monitoring. Food Control60, 346–352. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2015.07.038

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 107

  MoschopoulouG.TsekourasV.MercaderJ. V.Abad-FuentesA.KintziosS. (2024). Development of a portable cell-based biosensor for the ultra-rapid screening for Boscalid residues in lettuce. Biosensors14:311. doi: 10.3390/bios14060311,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 108

  MunteanuI. G.ApetreiC. (2021). A review on electrochemical sensors and biosensors used in chlorogenic acid electroanalysis. Int. J. Mol. Sci.22:13138. doi: 10.3390/ijms222313138,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 109

  NaikA.LeeH. S.HerringtonJ.BarandunG.FlockG.GüderF.et al. (2024). Smart packaging with disposable NFC-enabled wireless gas sensors for monitoring food spoilage. ACS Sens.9, 6789–6799. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.4c02510,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 110

  NamiM.TaheriM.SiddiquiJ.DeenI. A.PackirisamyM.DeenM. J.et al. (2024). Recent progress in intelligent packaging for seafood and meat quality monitoring. Adv. Mater. Technol.9:2301347. doi: 10.1002/admt.202301347

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 111

  NathS. (2024). Advancements in food quality monitoring: integrating biosensors for precision detection. Sustain. Food Technol.2, 976–992. doi: 10.1039/d4fb00094c

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 112

  NewairE. F.Al-AnaziA.GarciaF. (2023). Oxidation of wine polyphenols by electrochemical means in the presence of glutathione. Antioxidants12:1891. doi: 10.3390/antiox12101891,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 113

  NsanzaberaF.MwisenezaA.IrakozeE.NsengiyumvaJ. B.NduwayezuB.ManishimweA.et al. (2024). Emerging trends of immunosensors development for detection of food toxins. Turkish J. Agric. Food Sci. Technol.12, 1046–1060. doi: 10.24925/turjaf.v12i6.1046-1060.6800

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 114

  NurlelyAhmadM.Yook HengL.Ling TanL. (2021). Potentiometric enzyme biosensor for rapid determination of formaldehyde based on succinimide-functionalized polyacrylate ion-selective membrane. Measurement175:109112. doi: 10.1016/j.measurement.2021.109112

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 115

  OdeyemiO. A.BurkeC. M.BolchC. C. J.StanleyR. (2018). Seafood spoilage microbiota and associated volatile organic compounds at different storage temperatures and packaging conditions. Int. J. Food Microbiol.280, 87–99. doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2017.12.029,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 116

  OjedaJ.Torres-SalvadorF.BrunoN.EastwoodH.GerasimovaY.Chumbimuni-TorresK. (2024). Highly reproducible electrochemical biosensor for influenza a virus towards low-resource settings. Anal. Methods16, 772–779. doi: 10.1039/D3AY01825C,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 117

  OlaifaK.IkusikaE. O. (2025). Biosensors at the crossroads of food safety and antimicrobial resistance control in Africa. Discover Electrochem.2:46. doi: 10.1007/s44373-025-00061-7

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 118

  OuyangQ.ZhangM.YangY.DinZ. u.ChenQ. (2023). Mesoporous silica-modified upconversion biosensor coupled with real-time ion release properties for ultrasensitive detection of Staphylococcus aureus in meat. Food Control145:109444. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109444

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 119

  OzbeyS.KelesG.KurbanogluS. (2025). Innovations in graphene-based electrochemical biosensors in healthcare applications. Mikrochim. Acta, 192(192:290, doi: 10.1007/s00604-025-07141-w, .

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 120

  PaisV. F.VeríssimoM. I. S.OliveiraJ. A. B. P.GomesM. T. S. R. (2015). Using acoustic wave sensors to follow milk coagulation and to separate the cheeses according to the milk origin. Sens. Actuators B Chem., 207(PB), 1121–1128, doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2014.10.025.

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 121

  PandhiS.KumariN.JainA.SharmaV. (2025). Emerging technologies in food safety: AI-powered, nano-enabled, and biosensor-based strategies for rapid contaminant detection. Food Anal. Methods18, 2010–2024. doi: 10.1007/s12161-025-02844-5

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 122

  ParateK.PolaC. C.RangnekarS. V.Mendivelso-PerezD. L.SmithE. A.HersamM. C.et al. (2020). Aerosol-jet-printed graphene electrochemical histamine sensors for food safety monitoring. 2D Mater.7:034002. doi: 10.1088/2053-1583/ab8919

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 123

  ParlapaniF. F.BoziarisI. S.DrosinosE. H. (2024). “Detection of fish spoilage,” in Handbook of Seafood and Seafood Products Analysis, (CRC Press), 560–585.

  • Google Scholar

• 124

  Pascual-GarrigosA.Lozano-TorresB.DasA.MolloyJ. C. (2025). Colorimetric CRISPR biosensor: a case study with Salmonella Typhi. ACS Sens. (American Chemical Society), 10, 717–724. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.4c02029,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 125

  PérezS.BartrolíJ.FàbregasE. (2013). Amperometric biosensor for the determination of histamine in fish samples. Food Chem.141, 4066–4072. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.06.125,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 126

  Pérez-GonzálezC.Salvo-CominoC.Martin-PedrosaF.DiasL.Rodriguez-PerezM. A.Garcia-CabezonC.et al. (2021). Analysis of milk using a portable potentiometric electronic tongue based on five polymeric membrane sensors. Front. Chem.9:706460. doi: 10.3389/fchem.2021.706460,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 127

  PichúnB.NúñezC.ArancibiaV.MartíA. A.AguirreM. J.PizarroJ.et al. (2024). Enhanced voltammetric sensing platform based on gold nanorods and electrochemically reduced graphene oxide for as (III) determination in seafood samples. J. Appl. Electrochem.54, 1595–1606. doi: 10.1007/s10800-023-02026-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 128

  PreethichandraD. M. G.GholamiM. D.IzakeE. L.O’MullaneA. P.SonarP. (2023). Conducting polymer based ammonia and hydrogen sulfide chemical sensors and their suitability for detecting food spoilage. Adv. Mater. Technol.8:2200841. doi: 10.1002/admt.202200841

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 129

  QiP.WangJ.WangX.WangZ.XuH.DiS.et al. (2018). Sensitive and selective detection of the highly toxic pesticide carbofuran in vegetable samples by a molecularly imprinted electrochemical sensor with signal enhancement by AuNPs. RSC Adv.8, 25334–25341. doi: 10.1039/C8RA05022H,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 130

  QuL.ZhangX.ChuY.ZhangY.LinZ.KongF.et al. (2025). Research progress on nanotechnology-driven enzyme biosensors for electrochemical detection of biological pollution and food contaminants. Foods14:1254. doi: 10.3390/foods14071254,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 131

  RamadanK. M.BendaryE. S.KhalilH. B.AliS. A.AhmedA. R.MahmoudM. A. (2025). Smart detection of food spoilage using microbial volatile compounds: technologies, challenges, and future outlook. J. Agric. Food Chem.73, 19222–19243. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.5c05927,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 132

  RaniM. (2023). Microfluidic devices for electrochemical analysis of fruits freshness. Int. J. Res. Trends Innov.8:366. doi: 10.1729/Journal.33395

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 133

  Reyes-De-CorcueraJ. I.OlstadH. E.García-TorresR. (2018). Stability and stabilization of enzyme biosensors: the key to successful application and commercialization. Annu. Rev. Food Sci. Technol.9, 293–322. doi: 10.1146/annurev-food-030216-025713,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 134

  RisalvatoJ.SewidA. H.EdaS.GerholdR. W.WuJ. J. (2025). Strategic detection of Escherichia coli in the poultry industry: food safety challenges, one health approaches, and advances in biosensor technologies. Biosensors15:419. doi: 10.3390/bios15070419,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 135

  RizzottoF.KhalifeM.HouY.ChaixC.LagardeF.ScaramozzinoN.et al. (2023). Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors for food control. Micromachines, 14:1412.

  • Google Scholar

• 136

  SaherN. U.KanwalN. (2019). Assessment of some heavy metal accumulation and nutritional quality of shellfish with reference to human health and cancer risk assessment: a seafood safety approach. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.26, 5189–5201. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3764-6,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 137

  SanjayK. U.VinayC. M.PrabhuN. B.RaiP. S. (2025). Emerging trends in nucleic acid and peptide aptamers in plant science research. Planta261, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s00425-025-04637-w,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 138

  SarabanM.NumnuamA.NontipichetN.KangkamanoT.ThavarungkulP.KanatharanaP.et al. (2024). A disposable electrochemical caffeine sensor based on a screen-printed electrode modified with a copper-metal organic framework and functionalized multi-walled carbon nanotube nanocomposite. New J. Chem.48, 3638–3645. doi: 10.1039/D3NJ05570A

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 139

  SarkarT.AshrafP. M.SrinivesS.MulchandaniA. (2018). Calixarene-functionalized single-walled carbon nanotubes for sensitive detection of volatile amines. Sensors Actuators B Chem.268, 115–122. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2018.04.078

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 140

  ScottG. Y.AborodeA. T.AdesolaR. O.ElebesunuE. E.AgyapongJ.IbrahimA. M.et al. (2024). Transforming early microbial detection: investigating innovative biosensors for emerging infectious diseases. Adv. Biomarker Sci. Technol.6, 59–71. doi: 10.1016/j.abst.2024.04.002

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 141

  ShenP.LiM.LiR.HanB.MaH.HouX.et al. (2022). Aptamer-functionalized smart photonic hydrogels: application for the detection of thrombin in human serum. NPG Asia Mater.14, 1–12. doi: 10.1038/s41427-022-00443-y,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 142

  ShenY.ZhaoS.ChenF.LvY.FuL. (2024). Enhancing sensitivity and selectivity: current trends in electrochemical Immunosensors for organophosphate analysis. Biosensors14:496. doi: 10.3390/bios14100496,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 143

  SinghP. K.JairathG.AhlawatS. S.PatheraA.SinghP. (2016). Biosensor: an emerging safety tool for meat industry. J. Food Sci. Technol.53, 1759–1765. doi: 10.1007/s13197-015-2041-7,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 144

  SinghS.OumW.KimS. S.KimH. W. (2023). Functionalized multiwalled carbon nanotubes for highly stable room temperature and humidity-tolerant Triethylamine sensing. ACS Sens.8, 4664–4675. doi: 10.1021/acssensors.3c01721,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 145

  SionekB.PrzybylskiW.TamborK. (2020). Biosensors in evaluation of quality of meat and meat products-a review. Anim. Sci.20, 1151–1168. doi: 10.2478/aoas-2020-0057

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 146

  SobhanA.HossainA.WeiL.MuthukumarappanK.AhmedM. (2025). IoT-enabled biosensors in food packaging: a breakthrough in food safety for monitoring risks in real time. Foods14:1403. doi: 10.3390/foods14081403,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 147

  Stephen InbarajB.ChenB. H. (2016). Nanomaterial-based sensors for detection of foodborne bacterial pathogens and toxins as well as pork adulteration in meat products. J. Food Drug Anal.24, 15–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jfda.2015.05.001,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 148

  SubjakovaV.OravczovaV.TatarkoM.HianikT. (2021). Advances in electrochemical aptasensors and immunosensors for detection of bacterial pathogens in food. Electrochim. Acta389:138724. doi: 10.1016/j.electacta.2021.138724

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 149

  SumithaM. S.XavierT. S. (2023). Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors–a brief review. Hybrid Adv.2:100023. doi: 10.1016/j.hybadv.2023.100023

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 150

  SunJ.ZhangM.GaoQ.ShaoB. (2024). Screening biotoxin aptamer and their application of optical aptasensor in food stuff: a review. Front. Chem.12:1425774. doi: 10.3389/fchem.2024.1425774,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 151

  TajikS.DourandishZ.JahaniP. M.SheikhshoaieI.BeitollahiH.Shahedi AslM.et al. (2021). Recent developments in voltammetric and amperometric sensors for cysteine detection. RSC Adv.11, 5411–5425. doi: 10.1039/d0ra07614g,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 152

  TangX.CatananteG.HuangX.MartyJ. L.WangH.ZhangQ.et al. (2022). Screen-printed electrochemical immunosensor based on a novel nanobody for analyzing aflatoxin M1 in milk. Food Chem.383:132598. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.132598,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 153

  TasićŽ. Z.Petrović MihajlovićM. B.SimonovićA. T.RadovanovićM. B.AntonijevićM. M. (2022). Recent advances in electrochemical sensors for caffeine determination. Sensors22:9185. doi: 10.3390/s22239185,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 154

  TeymouriZ.ShekarchizadehH. (2022). A colorimetric indicator based on copper nanoparticles for volatile sulfur compounds to monitor fish spoilage in intelligent packaging. Food Packag. Shelf Life33:100884. doi: 10.1016/j.fpsl.2022.100884

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 155

  TorreR.Costa-RamaE.NouwsH. P. A.Delerue-MatosC. (2020). Diamine oxidase-modified screen-printed electrode for the redox-mediated determination of histamine. J. Anal. Sci. Technol.11:8. doi: 10.1186/s40543-020-0203-3

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 156

  TutejaS. K.DuffieldT.NeethirajanS. (2017). Graphene-based multiplexed disposable electrochemical biosensor for rapid on-farm monitoring of NEFA and βHBA dairy biomarkers. J. Mater. Chem. B5, 6930–6940. doi: 10.1039/c7tb01382e,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 157

  UmarL.RosandiV. A.SetiadiR. N.AgustirandiB.LindaT. M.KuswandiB. (2023). Amperometric microbial biosensor for sugars and sweetener classification using principal component analysis in beverages. J. Food Sci. Technol.60, 382–392. doi: 10.1007/s13197-022-05625-8,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 158

  VermaA.ArqamM.FraiwanA. (2025). Advances in impedimetric biosensors: current applications and future directions. Micromachines16:1244. doi: 10.3390/mi16111244,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 159

  VillalongaM. L.BorisovaB.ArenasC. B.VillalongaA.Arévalo-VillenaM.SánchezA.et al. (2019). Disposable electrochemical biosensors for Brettanomyces bruxellensis and total yeast content in wine based on core-shell magnetic nanoparticles. Sens. Actuators B Chem.279, 15–21. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2018.09.092

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 160

  WaiminJ.GopalakrishnanS.Heredia-RiveraU.KerrN. A.NejatiS.GallinaN. L. F.et al. (2022). Low-cost nonreversible electronic-free wireless pH sensor for spoilage detection in packaged meat products. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces14, 45752–45764. doi: 10.1021/acsami.2c09265

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 161

  WalkerN. L.RoshkolaevaA. B.ChapovalA. I.DickJ. E. (2021). Recent advances in potentiometric biosensing. Curr. Opin. Electrochem.28:100735. doi: 10.1016/j.coelec.2021.100735,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 162

  WangY.HeX.WangS.MaJ.HuD.LiangH.et al. (2024). Rapid detection of Salmonella typhimurium in food samples using electrochemical sensor. LWT206:116567. doi: 10.1016/j.lwt.2024.116567

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 163

  WangK.LinX.ZhangM.LiY.LuoC.WuJ. (2022). Review of electrochemical biosensors for food safety detection. Biosensors12:959. doi: 10.3390/bios12110959,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 164

  WangS. H.WangJ. W.ZhaoL. T.AbbasS. Z.YangZ.YongY. C. (2023). Soil microbial fuel cell based self-powered cathodic biosensor for sensitive detection of heavy metals. Biosensors13:145. doi: 10.3390/bios13010145,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 165

  WangX.XuY.LiY.LiY.LiZ.ZhangW.et al. (2021). Rapid detection of cadmium ions in meat by a multi-walled carbon nanotubes enhanced metal-organic framework modified electrochemical sensor. Food Chem.357:129762. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.129762,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 166

  WangW.YangW.LiM.ZhangZ.DuW. (2023). A novel approach for apple freshness prediction based on gas sensor array and optimized neural network. Sensors23:6476. doi: 10.3390/s23146476,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 167

  WeiS.WangF.ZhangL.ZhaoC.LiJ.WangJ. (2023). A portable smartphone-assisted highly emissive magnetic covalent organic framework-based fluorescence sensor for the detection of Salmonella typhimurium. Sens. Actuators B Chem.392:134076. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2023.134076

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 168

  WuK.DebliquyM.ZhangC. (2023). Metal–oxide–semiconductor resistive gas sensors for fish freshness detection. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.22, 913–945. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.13095,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 169

  WuJ.LiuH.ChenW.MaB.JuH. (2023). Device integration of electrochemical biosensors. Nat. Rev. Bioeng.1, 346–360. doi: 10.1038/s44222-023-00032-w,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 170

  WuY.WangC. W.WangD.WeiN. (2021). A whole-cell biosensor for point-of-care detection of waterborne bacterial pathogens. ACS Synth. Biol.10, 333–344. doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00491,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 171

  WuM.ZhuQ.LiuW.XiaoZ.JinL.LiuY.et al. (2025). Multi-functional electrochemiluminescence biosensor for efficient capture, elimination, and sensitive monitoring of Staphylococcus aureus. Biosens. Bioelectron.272:117112. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2024.117112,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 172

  XiaJ.HuangW.Majer-BaranyiK.ZhangM.ZhangX. (2023). Conformal temperature/impedance sensing patch based on graphene materials for nondestructive detection of fish freshness. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces15, 45095–45105. doi: 10.1021/acsami.3c08621,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 173

  XiaoF.LiW.WangZ.XuQ.SongY.HuangJ.et al. (2023). Smartphone-assisted biosensor based on broom-like bacteria-specific magnetic enrichment platform for colorimetric detection of Listeria monocytogenes. J. Hazard. Mater.459:132250. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.132250,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 174

  XuH.ChenQ.MengX.YanC.YaoB.ChenZ.et al. (2025). CRISPR/Cas12a-mediated cyclic signal amplification and electrochemical reporting strategy for rapid and accurate sensing of Vibrio parahaemolyticus in aquatic foods. Biosens. Bioelectron.277:117284. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2025.117284

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 175

  XuA.YuanJ.WangL.LiM.LinJ. (2025). A pd/pt nanocluster enhanced colorimetric biosensor for large-volume Salmonella detection. LWT215:117182. doi: 10.1016/J.LWT.2024.117182

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 176

  YaoH.XiaoJ.TangX. (2023). Microbial fuel cell-based organic matter sensors: principles, structures and applications. Bioengineering10:886. doi: 10.3390/bioengineering10080886,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 177

  YazdanparastS.BenvidiA.AbbasiS.RezaeinasabM. (2019). Enzyme-based ultrasensitive electrochemical biosensor using poly (l-aspartic acid)/MWCNT bio-nanocomposite for xanthine detection: a meat freshness marker. Microchem. J.149:104000. doi: 10.1016/j.microc.2019.104000

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 178

  YinL.JayanH.CaiJ.El-SeediH. R.GuoZ.ZouX. (2023). Spoilage Monitoring and Early Warning for Apples in Storage Using Gas Sensors and Chemometrics. Foods12:968. doi: 10.3390/foods12152968,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 179

  YuanC.TonyA.YinR.WangK.ZhangW. (2021). Tactile and thermal sensors built from carbon–polymer nanocomposites—a critical review. Sensors21:1234. doi: 10.3390/s21041234,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 180

  ZhangM.CuiX.LiN. (2022). Smartphone-based mobile biosensors for the point-of-care testing of human metabolites. Mater. Today Bio14:100254. doi: 10.1016/j.mtbio.2022.100254,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 181

  ZhangT.WangY.YuanR.QiY. (2025). Construction of an electrochemical aptasensor based on a covalent organic framework for rapid and ultrasensitive detection of Staphylococcus aureus. Sensors Actuators B Chem.428:137224. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2024.137224

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 182

  ZhangS.WuC.ZhaoZ.XuK. (2024). An electrochemical immunosensor based on chitosan–graphene nanosheets for aflatoxin B1 detection in corn. Molecules29:461. doi: 10.3390/molecules29071461,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 183

  ZhangC.XuL.MiaoX.ZhangD.XieY.HuY.et al. (2025). Machine learning assisted dual-modal SERS detection for circulating tumor cells. Biosens. Bioelectron.268:161. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2024.116897,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 184

  ZhangW.XuY.ZouX. (2017). A ZnO–RGO-modified electrode coupled to microwave digestion for the determination of trace cadmium and lead in six species fish. Anal. Methods9, 4418–4424. doi: 10.1039/C7AY01574G

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 185

  ZhangJ.ZhouM.YangL.HuangB.LuK.WenH.et al. (2025). Ultrasensitive electrochemical biosensor for bacteria detection based on Fe3O4@COF-AuNPs and trigging isothermal circular amplification. Sens. Actuators B Chem.422:136609. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2024.136609

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 186

  ZhenD.ZhangS.YangA.MaQ.DengZ.FangJ.et al. (2024). A supersensitive electrochemical sensor based on RCA amplification-assisted “silver chain”-linked gold interdigital electrodes and CRISPR/Cas9 for the detection of Staphylococcus aureus in food. Food Chem.440:138197. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.138197,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 187

  ZhouT.HanH.LiuP.XiongJ.TianF.LiX. (2017). Microbial fuels cell-based biosensor for toxicity detection: a review. Sensors17:2230. doi: 10.3390/s17102230,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 188

  ZhuS.WuZ.NiuX.ZhanX.TaoH.WuY. (2022). Novel nanozyme-catalyzed and magnetically assisted colorimetric biosensor for Staphylococcus aureus detection with a low matrix effect from complex environments. Sensors Actuators B Chem.373:132752. doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2022.132752

  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar

• 189

  ZouY.LibanoriA.XuJ.NashalianA.ChenJ. (2020). Triboelectric Nanogenerator enabled smart shoes for wearable electricity generation. Research2020:7158953. doi: 10.34133/2020/7158953,

  • Pubmed Abstract
  • CrossRef
  • Google Scholar