Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Sensors
Volume 2016 (2016), Article ID 4046061, 8 pages
Review Article

Intelligent Packaging Systems: Sensors and Nanosensors to Monitor Food Quality and Safety

1Industrial Engineering Department, University of Santiago de Chile, Avenida Ecuador 3769, Santiago de Chile, Chile
2Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Administrativas, Universidad Central de Chile, Lord Cochrane 417, Santiago de Chile, Chile
3Electrical Engineering Department, University of Santiago de Chile, Avenida Ecuador 3519, Santiago de Chile, Chile
4Facultad de Ingenieria, Universidad Andres Bello, Antonio Varas 880, Santiago de Chile, Chile
5Departamento de Matemáticas y Física, Facultad de Ingeniería y Administración, Universidad Bernardo O’Higgins, Avenida Viel 1497, Ruta 5 Sur, Santiago de Chile, Chile
6Faculty of Management and Economics, University of Santiago de Chile, Avenida Libertador Bernardo O’Higgins 3363, Santiago de Chile, Chile

Received 29 April 2016; Accepted 18 September 2016

Academic Editor: Stephane Evoy

Copyright © 2016 Guillermo Fuertes et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


The application of nanotechnology in different areas of food packaging is an emerging field that will grow rapidly in the coming years. Advances in food safety have yielded promising results leading to the development of intelligent packaging (IP). By these containers, it is possible to monitor and provide information of the condition of food, packaging, or the environment. This article describes the role of the different concepts of intelligent packaging. It is possible that this new technology could reach enhancing food safety, improving pathogen detection time, and controlling the quality of food and packaging throughout the supply chain.

1. Introduction

Globalization and dynamism in the exchange of products, along with reduced time for selection/cooking with fresh ingredients, and the growing interest in health safety and environment are the main challenges and enhance the development of new improved packaging concepts [1]. According to [2], among packaging optimization strategies to reduce food waste, there are size diversification to help consumers buy the right amount and new packaging designs to prevent the loss of scent and the appropriate moisture content [3].

The safety of food products is one of the main objectives of food law. Quality control in food manufacturing is closely related to technology, physical and sensory attributes of the product, the microbiological safety, the chemical composition, and nutritional value [4].

The functions of the packages include protection, containment, communication with the user, ergonomics and marketing (Figure 1). Containment means ensuring the right quantities of products to avoid spills. The communication function is regulated by law and the proper display will influence the consumer acceptance of the product. The information must contain features such as weight, origin, ingredients, nutritional value, precautions for use, mode of transport, and recycling or disposal. Trademarks used packaging and labels for promotion, marketing, and product sales [5]. Ergonomics in the consumption of a food product is related to minimizing physical effort and discomfort to transport, store, use, and dispose of the container [6]. It has been shown that the physical characteristics and improved containment aspect of food packaging are expectations that affect sales of products and consumer attitudes [7].

Figure 1: Application matrix of nanotechnology in food science and technology.

According to [8], the global market for active and intelligent packaging will double between 2011 and 2021, growing at an annual rate of 8% until 2016, reaching US $17,230 million, and later at an annual rate of 7, 7%, reaching US $24,650 million in 2021. The global demand for electronic smart packaging will grow to over $1.45 billion in the next decade [9]. Several relevant markets are forecasted for this type of packaging over the next decade; the most important is United States, with an annual growth of 7.4%, reaching US $3,600 million, followed by Japan, the second largest market, reaching a size of US $2,360 million; Australia, US $1,690 million; UK, US $1,270 million; and finally Germany, US $1,400 million.

2. Smart Packaging Concepts

IP is any type of container that provides a specific functionality beyond function physical barrier between the food product and the surrounding environment [10]. Knowing information about the product quality, the packaging or the environment establishes a bond of responsibility throughout the food supply chain (storage, transport, distribution, and sale). IPs are packaging technologies that through internal and external indicators monitor interaction between the food, the packaging, and the environment [11]. This type of packaging analyzes the system, processes information, and presents it, without generally exerting any action on the food. There are two ways in the intelligent packaging systems, supporting data systems (bars labels or radiofrequency identification plates) used to store or transmit data and indicators of incidents or biosensors in packaging that allow control of the environment and product packaging [12].

Consumers increasingly need to know what ingredients or components are in the product and how the product should be stored, used, and discarded after use. Smart tags and stickers, for example, will be able to communicate directly with the customer via thin film devices that provide visual information. Many companies have deployed IP solutions on the market (Table 1).

Table 1: Commercial applications available on the market IP.

3. Applications

3.1. Time and Temperature Indicators

Because of their simplicity, low cost, affordability, and efficiency, Time and Temperature Indicators (TTI) have been widely used to monitor and translate consumer quality of foodstuffs [13]. A prerequisite for the effective implementation of a control system based TTI is the kinetic study and modeling of loss ratios food quality and response [14]. Different types of TTI trade have been developed on the enzymatic base and polymeric and biological reactions [15]. To ensure the safety and quality of food products that need a certain temperature, it is important to monitor changes in the parameters of temperature and time from production to the final consumer [16, 17]. TTI can be placed in transport containers or individual containers as a small sticker; an irreversible chemical change will be reflected if the food is exposed to a different recommended temperature [18] (Figure 2). TTI are particularly important for the quality and safety of chilled or frozen food, where cold storage is a critical control point during the transport and distribution [19].

Figure 2: Schematic representation of the TTI. (a) Fresh-Check; (b) Timestrip; (c) MonitorMark; (d) CheckPoint.
3.2. Integrity Indicators

The gas composition in the package may change due to the interaction of food with the environment. Gas indicators are a useful means of controlling the toxic composition of the gases produced from decomposing food in a food container that can endanger the health of consumers [20]; as a control measure, a change occurs in the indicator color by chemical or enzymatic reaction (Figure 3). The tag is activated at the time of consumption, the seal is broken when a timer goes off, and a color change is experienced over time [21]. Indicators must be in direct contact with the gaseous environment immediately surrounding the food in a container. The presence of oxygen may indicate that the package was sealed incorrectly, is leaking, or has been tampered with. Reference [22] describes the synthesis and manufacture of a nontoxic surface coating activated by exposure to molecular oxygen of a substrate through the irreversible formation of colored spots. Plastic optical fluorescent films are highly sensitive for the detection of gases and dissolved CO2 [23]. The detection of CO2 in modified atmosphere (MAP) and conventional packaging have gained considerable attention in the industry IP [24].

Figure 3: Schematic representation of the leak indicators.
3.3. Freshness Indicators

A freshness indicator directly indicates the quality of the product; it is usually in the form of labels on the container. Typically, these indicators focus on the detection of the first kind of change (pH, gas composition, etc.). These changes are detected by the indicators and transformed into a response, usually a color response which can be easily measured and correlated with the freshness of food.

This response can be conditioned by the modifications of substances that are related to the metabolism of microorganisms, such as the occurrence of volatile nitrogen compounds, amines, organic acids, carbon dioxide, ethanol, glucose, or sulfur compounds during storage indicating microbial growth [25].

This type of indicators is based on indirect detection of metabolites through color indicators (e.g., pH) or based on direct detection of metabolites by biosensors. COX Technologies solutions company launched the Fresh Tag® indicator (colorimetric indicator that informs users about the formation of volatile amines in fishery products) but this product was removed from the market in 2004 [26]. Label sensor is manufactured based on methyl red; red/methyl cellulose membrane works on the increase in pH, due to volatile amines decomposition. It was successfully used as a sensor label for real-time monitoring of fresh meat of broiler chicken [27]. RipeSense™ is the first intelligent sensor label that changes color to indicate the ripeness of the fruit [28]. It works through the reaction of the aromas released by the fruit as it ripens; initially it is red and then graduates to orange and finally yellow, depending on the selection of the desired level of maturity when it comes to eating the fruit (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Schematic representation of the RipeSense indicator.

The indicator SensorQ™ developed by DSM NV (pH sensor based on anthocyanins capable of reporting formation of biogenic amines in microbiological origin meat) is an indicator of freshness for spoilage of fish. This consists of a polymer matrix which contains a solution with green dye bromocresol sensitive to the pH, by monitoring colour changes in the compounds volatile, on the basis of the quantity of amines [29]. This last freshness indicator did not achieve a successful commercialization. Additionally, the authors in [30] developed a new colorimetric sensor for monitoring the deterioration of fish meat.

3.4. Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)

RFID tags are an advanced form of support data information that can identify and locate a product with a special tag that emits radio waves. These are classified into four types: active, passive, semiactive, and semipassive, depending on the power supply for communication and other functions. These devices may be coupled to an article, box, container, or pallet and therefore can be identified and tracked [31]. RFID tags can be read from several meters away and beyond the line of sight [32]; active RFID have a reading range of 91 m or more and also have a battery that enables them to communicate autonomously. Passive tags have no internal power supply; therefore, they are not able to communicate until the emission of an RFID reader is activated. The radio frequency field produced by the reader provides enough power to the integrated circuit of the label, to be able to reflect energy to the reader. Its transmission range can reach as much as 6 m. RFID systems are classified depending on the frequency range used: low frequency (LF), between 125 and 134.2 KHz; high frequency (HF), 13.56 MHz; ultrahigh frequency (UHF), 868–956 MHz; and active frequency or microwave frequency, 2.45 GHz. RFID technologies are grouped within systems called automatic identification (Auto ID).

RFID is still an expensive alternative on top of several obstacles to overcome implementation in certain sectors, 100% data reliability, and specific limitations (short-range, narrow bandwidth, and low power) [33]. The long-term vision is able to print RFID labels directly onto paper or plastic instead of silicon, while investments in the components (sensors, tags, antennas, readers, connectors, cables, networks, controllers, software, and consulting and implementation processes) are expensive. Currently, inkjet printed circuits have a very low resolution and cover large surface areas compared to traditional circuits [34].

RFID systems consist of two major components: transponder or tag and interrogator or reader, which create wireless data transmission. Each RFID tag applied to food packaging transmits the identification information to a reader, which allows communication with the RFID tag. The tag then transmits information back to the reader [35]. This information in most cases is passed to a computer (Figure 5). Readers are available as handheld computers or fixed devices that can be placed in strategic locations. According to [36], RFID tags can be read-write (you can add information to the label or write on existing data) or read-only (information stored during manufacturing process).

Figure 5: Schematic representation of the RFID system.

Many advances have been made in this field such as the development of a pH sensor embedded in a radio frequency transmitter without batteries, for in situ monitoring of deterioration processes of fish products [37]; RFID tag to control the freshness of meat [38]; RFID tag with an optical oxygen indicator for use in MAP [39]; RFID tag with a temperature sensor, a gas sensor, a reader, and a server, making up a tracking system for the freshness of pork [40]; RFID tag with sensors capable of measuring temperature, humidity, and the presence of volatile amine compounds, to estimate cod fish freshness [41]; RFID tag along with CO2 and oxygen sensor for monitoring the freshness of vegetables [42]; system real-time evaluation of the freshness of packaged milk, marketing, and distribution using RFID tags [43].

4. Contribution of Nanotechnology in the Monitoring of Food Security

Nanotechnology involves the study, design, creation, synthesis, manipulation, and application of materials, devices, and functional systems through the control and exploitation of phenomena and properties of matter on a very small scale, usually between 1 and 100 nanometers’ length. The new packaging technologies will depend on the development of nanomaterials and nanoparticles; these may include nanoparticles, nanotubes, fullerenes, nanofibers, nanocylinder, and nanosheets [44]. The unique optical and electronic properties of this nanomaterial enable the development of a new generation of electronic devices, for example, nanotransistors to build future nanoprocessors and nanomemory [45], nanobattery [46], and nanosensors [47, 48].

Nanotechnology is an interdisciplinary powerful tool for the development of intelligent packaging systems. It has been predicted that nanotechnology will have an impact on at least $3 trillion in the world economy by 2020, creating a demand for 6 million employers in various industries [49].

For the development of IP, the integration and the technological advancement of the sensors, nanosensors, and indicators are essential. These three terms are used interchangeably, but they are not. A sensor/nanosensor measures only certain aspects, while an indicator integrates measurement and display. The sensors and nanosensor must be connected to a device for signal transduction of the receptor, while an indicator directly provides qualitative or semiquantitative information of the quality for a visible change [50].

Nanotechnology enables the application of nanosensors in the food packaging to control their quality, during the various stages of the logistic process, and to ensure product quality to the final consumer [51]. Nanotechnology through IP can help in providing authentication, tracking, and locating product features to avoid falsification, adulteration, and prevention in the diversity of products intended for a specific market [52]. There are still many concerns for consumers of food nanotechnology; one of the most important is the uncertainty of the behavior of nanoparticles in the body and the toxic effects they could have. For this, it is necessary to establish a set of protocols and regulations on the food security of IP implications. The use of nanotechnology depends on the market and the geographical position; China’s consumers are more willing to accept new technologies, while consumers in Switzerland tend to be less responsive [53].

4.1. Sensors and Nanosensors

Thanks to technological advances and the research design, the fabrication of nanoscale components is a reality. Such components are used to set up basic structural and functional devices called nanomachines (NM), whose size is expressed in nanometers and unit of length equals a billionth part of a meter (1 nm = 10−9 m). Generally, sensors/nanosensors are placed in food packaging to control internal and external conditions of food [54]. From a microbiological point of view, the main objective is to reduce nanosensors pathogen detection time from days to hours or even minutes. Several authors have worked in the development of nanosensors. These NM are used in the detection of molecules, gases, and microorganisms and detection by surface enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) [49]; nanosensors in raw bacon packaging for detecting oxygen [55]; electronic tongue for inclusion in food packaging consisting of an array of nanosensors extremely sensitive to gases released by spoiled food, giving a clear and visible sign if the food is fresh or not [52]; use of fluorescent nanoparticles to detect pathogens and toxins in food and crops [56], for example, detection of pathogenic bacteria in food (Salmonella typhimurium, Shigella flexneri, and Escherichia coli O157: H7), based on functionalized quantum dots coupled with immunomagnetic separation in milk and apple juice [57]; nanosensors to detect temperature changes [58, 59], where food companies like Kraft Foods are incorporating nanosensors that detect the profile of a food consumer (likes and dislikes), allergies, and nutritional deficiencies [60]; nanosensors for the detection of organophosphate pesticide residues in food [61]; nanosensors to detect humidity or temperature changes due to moisture [62]; sensor for detecting Escherichia coli in a food sample, by measuring and detecting scattering of light by cellular mitochondria [63]; biosensor for instantly detecting Salmonella in foods [64] and sensor to detect CO2 as a direct indicator of the quality of the food [65]; biosensor for the detection of the pathogen food, Bacillus cereus [66]. Research and development in nanosensors have led to important scientific advances that enable a new generation of these NM. Nanosensors researches applied to IP are in their early stages of development.

4.1.1. Communication between Nanosensors and Their Application in Intelligent Packaging

The IP incorporating nanosensors will have great benefits for the food industry. These NM in the form of tiny chips invisible to the human eye are embedded in food or in containers, for use as electronic bar code, which allows for the monitoring of food in all its phases (production, processing, distribution, and consumption) [67]. There is no record of any investigation that extends this monitoring process until the last stage.

Communication between NM is a promising technology that ensures the development of new devices capable of performing basic and simple tasks at nanolevel (computing, data storage, detection, and triggering) [68].

The nanosensors have a limited field of measurement; therefore, the development of the wireless nanosensor networks (WNSNs) is essential for the IP industry. Such networks are a set of nodes of nanosensors dynamically self-organizing necessarily in a wireless network with possible use in any preexisting infrastructure [69]. WNSN is in its early stages of research and development for application in IP. However, matrices sensitive to gases released by spoiled food are developing nanosensors.

One major drawback is the limited energy that can be stored in a nanosensor speck in contrast to the energy required by the device to communicate. Recently, novel collecting energy mechanisms have been proposed to replenish energy stored in nanodevices. With these mechanisms, WNSNs can overcome the bottleneck and even have infinite life (perpetual WNSNs) [70]. For now, the limitations of size and power of nanodevices limit the applicability of wireless communication.

One of the most recent alternatives is based on the use of graphene, a nanomaterial of one-atom thickness, which was first obtained experimentally in 2004 [71]. Graphene enables wireless communication between nanosystems, because of its ability to support surface plasmon polariton (SPP) in the terahertz frequency range [72]. The main difference between classical plasmonic antennas and graphene-based plasmonic antennas is that SPP waves in graphene are observed at frequencies in the Terahertz Band, for example, two orders of magnitude below SPP waves observed in gold and other noble materials [73]. The SPP waves require less energy making the communication between NM feasible [74, 75].

5. Conclusions

The current advance of nanotechnology has a high potential benefit to society especially for the food industry. The development of intelligent packing systems is an emerging field that will focus on food security and will grow exponentially in the coming years. The future of food security depends largely on the technological advancement of nanosensors, integration of a nanosensor in a food container, and generating breakthroughs in IP solutions. This new packaging system can assist in the detection, monitoring, tracking, recording, and communication throughout the supply chain. The interconnection of nanosensors can extend the capabilities of a single nanosensor by allowing it to cooperate and share information; thus, the WNSNs will have a major impact on almost all areas of our society and change our daily lives. Currently, these networks are at an early stage of research and development; an example of this is the limitations that exist in the nanocommunication and the nanobatteries. The commercialization of this technology is linked to the advancement of printed electronics for mass production; it is expected that smart labels and smart packaging will reach low cost relative to the food product.

Competing Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.


The authors acknowledge the financial support of the “Center for Multidisciplinary Research on Signal Processing” (CONICYT/ACT1120 Project) and the USACH/DICYT 061413SG Project and also the industrial designer Alexander Pereira, for his help in the design of the figures.


  1. R. Dobrucka, “The future of active and intelligent packaging industry,” Logforum, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 103–110, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  2. F. Wikström, H. Williams, K. Verghese, and S. Clune, “The influence of packaging attributes on consumer behaviour in food-packaging life cycle assessment studies—a neglected topic,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 73, pp. 100–108, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. G. H. Zhou, X. L. Xu, and Y. Y. Liu, “Preservation technologies for fresh meat—a review,” Meat Science, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 119–128, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. S. A. H. Lim, J. Antony, and S. Albliwi, “Statistical Process Control (SPC) in the food industry—a systematic review and future research agenda,” Trends in Food Science and Technology, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 137–151, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. J. H. Han, “Chapter 1—a review of food packaging technologies and innovations,” in Innovations in Food Packaging, J. H. Han, Ed., Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2nd edition, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  6. A. Azzi, D. Battini, A. Persona, and F. Sgarbossa, “Packaging design: general framework and research agenda,” Packaging Technology and Science, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 435–456, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. Y. Tu, Z. Yang, and C. Ma, “Touching tastes: the haptic perception transfer of liquid food packaging materials,” Food Quality and Preference, vol. 39, pp. 124–130, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. I. Quezada, “Envases activos e inteligentes: tendencias y principales aplicaciones para el comercio de carne,” Agrimundo 7, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  9. R. Das and G. Chansin, Smart Packaging Comes to Market: Brand Enhancement with Electronics 2014–2024, IDTechEx, 2013.
  10. J. Brockgreitens and A. Abbas, “Responsive food packaging: recent progress and technological prospects,” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 3–15, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. K. B. Biji, C. N. Ravishankar, C. O. Mohan, and T. K. Srinivasa Gopal, “Smart packaging systems for food applications: a review,” Journal of Food Science and Technology, vol. 52, no. 10, pp. 6125–6135, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. A. Bagchi, “Intelligent sensing and packaging of foods for enhancement of shelf life: concepts and applications,” International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, vol. 3, no. 10, 2012. View at Google Scholar
  13. S. Zabala, J. Castán, and C. Martínez, “Development of a time-temperature indicator (TTI) label by rotary printing technologies,” Food Control, vol. 50, pp. 57–64, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. T. Tsironi, A. Stamatiou, M. Giannoglou, E. Velliou, and P. S. Taoukis, “Predictive modelling and selection of time temperature integrators for monitoring the shelf life of modified atmosphere packed gilthead seabream fillets,” LWT—Food Science and Technology, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 1156–1163, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. D. Wu, S. Hou, J. Chen et al., “Development and characterization of an enzymatic time-temperature indicator (TTI) based on Aspergillus niger lipase,” LWT—Food Science and Technology, vol. 60, no. 2, part 2, pp. 1100–1104, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. B. Kuswandi, Jayus, A. Restyana, A. Abdullah, L. Y. Heng, and M. Ahmad, “A novel colorimetric food package label for fish spoilage based on polyaniline film,” Food Control, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 184–189, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. E. Kim, D. Y. Choi, H. C. Kim, K. Kim, and S. J. Lee, “Calibrations between the variables of microbial TTI response and ground pork qualities,” Meat Science, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 362–367, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. J. U. Kim, K. Ghafoor, J. Ahn et al., “Kinetic modeling and characterization of a diffusion-based time-temperature indicator (TTI) for monitoring microbial quality of non-pasteurized angelica juice,” LWT—Food Science and Technology, vol. 67, pp. 143–150, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. C. Zhang, A.-X. Yin, R. Jiang et al., “Time-temperature indicator for perishable products based on kinetically programmable Ag overgrowth on Au nanorods,” ACS Nano, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 4561–4568, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. Matindoust, M. Baghaei-Nejad, M. H. Shahrokh Abadi, Z. Zou, and L. Zheng, “Food quality and safety monitoring using gas sensor array in intelligent packaging,” Sensor Review, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 169–183, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  21. C. E. Realini and B. Marcos, “Active and intelligent packaging systems for a modern society,” Meat Science, vol. 98, no. 3, pp. 404–419, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. C. Shillingford, C. W. Russell, I. B. Burgess, and J. Aizenberg, “Bioinspired artificial melanosomes as colorimetric indicators of oxygen exposure,” ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 4314–4317, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  23. A. Mills and D. Yusufu, “Highly CO2 sensitive extruded fluorescent plastic indicator film based on HPTS,” Analyst, vol. 141, no. 3, pp. 999–1008, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. X. Meng, S. Kim, P. Puligundla, and S. Ko, “Carbon dioxide and oxygen gas sensors-possible application for monitoring quality, freshness, and safety of agricultural and food products with emphasis on importance of analytical signals and their transformation,” Journal of the Korean Society for Applied Biological Chemistry, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 723–733, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. I. S. Arvanitoyannis and A. C. Stratakos, “Application of modified atmosphere packaging and active/smart technologies to red meat and poultry: a review,” Food and Bioprocess Technology, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 1423–1446, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. J. P. Kerry, “New packaging technologies, materials and formats for fast-moving consumer products,” in Innovations in Food Packaging, J. H. Han, Ed., chapter 23, Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2nd edition, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  27. B. Kuswandi, Jayus, R. Oktaviana, A. Abdullah, and L. Y. Heng, “A novel on-package sticker sensor based on methyl red for real-time monitoring of broiler chicken cut freshness,” Packaging Technology and Science, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 69–81, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. J. K. Raynes, J. A. Carver, S. L. Gras, and J. A. Gerrard, “Protein nanostructures in food—should we be worried?” Trends in Food Science and Technology, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 42–50, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. H.-N. Chun, B. Kim, and H.-S. Shin, “Evaluation of a freshness indicator for quality of fish products during storage,” Food Science and Biotechnology, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 1719–1725, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. M. K. Morsy, K. Zór, N. Kostesha et al., “Development and validation of a colorimetric sensor array for fish spoilage monitoring,” Food Control, vol. 60, pp. 346–352, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. V. Kebo, P. Stasa, F. Benes, and J. Svub, “Rfid technology in logistic processes,” in Proceedings of the 13th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference (SGEM '13), vol. 1, pp. 219–226, Albena, Bulgaria, June 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. K. Sari, “Exploring the impacts of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology on supply chain performance,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 174–183, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  33. S. Shao and R. J. Burkholder, “Item-level RFID tag location sensing utilizing reader antenna spatial diversity,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 3767–3774, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  34. D. Sharma and K. Panwar, “Radio Frequency Identification (RFID),” International Journal of Research, vol. 1, no. 10, pp. 125–129, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  35. C. Costa, F. Antonucci, F. Pallottino, J. Aguzzi, D. Sarriá, and P. Menesatti, “A review on agri-food supply chain traceability by means of RFID technology,” Food and Bioprocess Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 353–366, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  36. A. López-Gómez, F. Cerdán-Cartagena, J. Suardíaz-Muro et al., “Radiofrequency identification and surface acoustic wave technologies for developing the food intelligent packaging concept,” Food Engineering Reviews, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 11–32, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. W.-D. Huang, S. Deb, Y.-S. Seo, S. Rao, M. Chiao, and J. C. Chiao, “A passive radio-frequency pH-Sensing tag for wireless food-quality monitoring,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 487–495, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  38. K.-H. Eom, K.-H. Hyun, S. Lin, and J.-W. Kim, “The meat freshness monitoring system using the smart RFID tag,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 10, no. 7, Article ID 591812, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  39. A. Martínez-Olmos, J. Fernández-Salmerón, N. Lopez-Ruiz, A. Rivadeneyra Torres, L. F. Capitan-Vallvey, and A. J. Palma, “Screen printed flexible radiofrequency identification tag for oxygen monitoring,” Analytical Chemistry, vol. 85, no. 22, pp. 11098–11105, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. L. Sen, K. Hwan Hyun, J. Woong Kim, J. Won Shin, and K. Hwan Eom, “The design of smart RFID system with gas sensor for meat freshness monitoring,” Advanced Science and Technology Letters, vol. 41, pp. 17–20, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  41. E. Smits, J. Schram, M. Nagelkerke et al., “Development of printed RFID sensor tags for smart food packaging,” in Proceedings of the 14th International Meeting on Chemical Sensors, pp. 403–406, Nuremberg, Germany, 2012.
  42. K. H. Eom, M. C. Kim, S. Lee, and C. won Lee, “The vegetable freshness monitoring system using RFID with oxygen and carbon dioxide sensor,” International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, vol. 2012, Article ID 472986, 6 pages, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. A. Potyrailo, N. Nagraj, Z. Tang, F. J. Mondello, C. Surman, and W. Morris, “Battery-free radio frequency identification (RFID) sensors for food quality and safety,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 60, no. 35, pp. 8535–8543, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. M. Cushen, J. Kerry, M. Morris, M. Cruz-Romero, and E. Cummins, “Nanotechnologies in the food industry—recent developments, risks and regulation,” Trends in Food Science and Technology, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 30–46, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. Y. Wu, Y.-M. Lin, A. A. Bol et al., “High-frequency, scaled graphene transistors on diamond-like carbon,” Nature, vol. 472, no. 7341, pp. 74–78, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. L. Ji, Z. Tan, T. Kuykendall et al., “Multilayer nanoassembly of Sn-nanopillar arrays sandwiched between graphene layers for high-capacity lithium storage,” Energy and Environmental Science, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 3611–3616, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  47. V. Sorkin and Y. W. Zhang, “Graphene-based pressure nano-sensors,” Journal of Molecular Modeling, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 2825–2830, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. S. Abadal, E. Alarcón, A. Cabellos-Aparicio, M. Lemme, and M. Nemirovsky, “Graphene-enabled wireless communication for massive multicore architectures,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 137–143, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. T. V. Duncan, “Applications of nanotechnology in food packaging and food safety: barrier materials, antimicrobials and sensors,” Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, vol. 363, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. J. K. Heising, M. Dekker, P. V. Bartels, and M. A. J. S. (Tiny) Van Boekel, “Monitoring the quality of perishable foods: opportunities for intelligent packaging,” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 645–654, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. S. Neethirajan and D. S. Jayas, “Nanotechnology for the food and bioprocessing industries,” Food and Bioprocess Technology, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 39–47, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. M. Bowles and J. Lu, “Removing the blinders: a literature review on the potential of nanoscale technologies for the management of supply chains,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 190–198, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. A. L. Brody, H. Zhuang, and J. H. Han, “Modified atmosphere packaging for fresh-cut fruits and vegetables,” in Modified Atmosphere Packaging for Fresh-Cut Fruits and Vegetables, pp. 1–7, John Wiley & Sons, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  54. K. Ramachandraiah, S. G. Han, and K. B. Chin, “Nanotechnology in meat processing and packaging: potential applications—a review,” Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 290–302, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. A. Mills, “Oxygen indicators and intelligent inks for packaging food,” Chemical Society Reviews, vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 1003–1011, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. K. P. Burris and C. N. Stewart Jr., “Fluorescent nanoparticles: sensing pathogens and toxins in foods and crops,” Trends in Food Science & Technology, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 143–152, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. Y. Zhao, M. Ye, Q. Chao, N. Jia, Y. Ge, and H. Shen, “Simultaneous detection of multifood-borne pathogenic bacteria based on functionalized quantum dots coupled with immunomagnetic separation in food samples,” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, vol. 57, no. 2, pp. 517–524, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. A. A. Iliadis and H. A. Ali, “Properties of fast response room temperature ZnO-Si heterojunction gas nanosensors,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 652–656, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. J. Lee, S. Mubeen, C. M. Hangarter, A. Mulchandani, W. Chen, and N. V. Myung, “Selective and rapid room temperature detection of H2S using gold nanoparticle chain arrays,” Electroanalysis, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 2623–2628, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. D. D. Meetoo, “Nanotechnology and the food sector: from the farm to the table,” Emirates Journal of Food and Agriculture, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 387–403, 2011. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  61. S. Liu, L. Yuan, X. Yue, Z. Zheng, and Z. Tang, “Recent advances in nanosensors for organophosphate pesticide detection,” Advanced Powder Technology, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 419–441, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  62. H. Zhang, Z. Li, W. Wang, C. Wang, and L. Liu, “Na+-doped zinc oxide nanofiber membrane for high speed humidity sensor,” Journal of the American Ceramic Society, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 142–146, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. S. R. Horner, C. R. Mace, L. J. Rothberg, and B. L. Miller, “A proteomic biosensor for enteropathogenic E. coli,” Biosensors and Bioelectronics, vol. 21, no. 8, pp. 1659–1663, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. J. Fu, B. Park, G. Siragusa et al., “An Au/Si hetero-nanorod-based biosensor for Salmonella detection,” Nanotechnology, vol. 19, no. 15, Article ID 155502, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. P. Puligundla, J. Jung, and S. Ko, “Carbon dioxide sensors for intelligent food packaging applications,” Food Control, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 328–333, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. S. Pal, E. C. Alocilja, and F. P. Downes, “Nanowire labeled direct-charge transfer biosensor for detecting Bacillus species,” Biosensors and Bioelectronics, vol. 22, no. 9-10, pp. 2329–2336, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. G. Fuertes, I. Soto, M. Vargas, A. Valencia, J. Sabattin, and R. Carrasco, “Nanosensors for a monitoring system in intelligent and active packaging,” Journal of Sensors, vol. 2016, Article ID 7980476, 8 pages, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  68. I. Akyildiz and J. Jornet, “The Internet of nano-things,” IEEE Wireless Communications, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 58–63, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. V. Upadhayay, “Application of wireless nano sensor networks for wild lives,” International Journal of Distributed and Parallel systems, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 173–181, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  70. J. M. Jornet and I. F. Akyildiz, “Joint energy harvesting and communication analysis for perpetual wireless nanosensor networks in the terahertz band,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 570–580, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  71. A. K. Geim and K. S. Novoselov, “The rise of graphene,” Nature Materials, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 183–191, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  72. A. Cabellos-Aparicio, I. Llatser, E. Alarcón, A. Hsu, and T. Palacios, “Use of terahertz photoconductive sources to characterize tunable graphene RF plasmonic antennas,” IEEE Transactions on Nanotechnology, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 390–396, 2015. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  73. J. M. Jornet and I. F. Akyildiz, “Graphene-based plasmonic nano-antenna for terahertz band communication in nanonetworks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 685–694, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  74. A. Vakil and N. Engheta, “Transformation optics using graphene,” Science, vol. 332, no. 6035, pp. 1291–1294, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  75. I. F. Akyildiz, J. M. Jornet, and C. Han, “Terahertz band: next frontier for wireless communications,” Physical Communication, vol. 12, pp. 16–32, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus