4.8 Review

Challenges and potential solutions for nanosensors intended for use with foods

Journal

NATURE NANOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 251-265

Publisher

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41565-021-00867-7

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. FDA HHS [U19 FD005322] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available