Chapter 11

Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring

in Green Packaging Solutions

Gazi Farhan Ishraque Toki , Anik Das , Rezaul Karim Khan Alave ,
and Rony Mia

Abstract There has been a lot of research into chemical and biosensor develop-
ment over the last several decades, and that has led to some fascinating new sensor
devices that could be useful in many fields, including food technology. A new kind of
environmentally friendly food packaging called “smart” or “intelligent” has emerged
by integrating these sensors. Integrating knowledge from several disciplines, these
systems draw on food technology, science, chemistry, biochemistry, electronics, and
physics. Smart packaging keeps tabs on food quality and safety throughout the supply
chain, from farmers to consumers, using chemical or bio-type sensors. Many other
kinds of sensors that measure things like time, temperature, carbon dioxide, oxygen,
pathogens, freshness, and leakage can be created using this technology. Online assur-
ance of quality and security for consumers, authorities, and food producers is a must,
and this technology shows enormous promise for expanding the capabilities of green
packaging with sensors that go beyond the existing state of the art in areas such as
controlling the food’s volume, color, and appearance.

Keywords Green packing · Intelligent packaging · Smart packing · Smart

sensors · Quality monitoring · Food quality indicators

G. F. I. Toki
Nanotechnology Center, School of Fashion and Textiles, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Kowloon 999077, Hong Kong
A. Das
School of Textile Science and Engineering, Tiangong University, Tianjin 300387, People’s
Republic of China
R. K. K. Alave
Shanghai Frontier Science Research Center for Modern Textiles, College of Textiles, Donghua
University, Shanghai 201620, People’s Republic of China
R. Mia (B)
Wilson College of Textiles, North Carolina State University, 1020 Main Campus Dr,
Raleigh 27606, NC, United States
e-mail: mroni_mia@[Link]
Department of Textile Engineering, National Institute of Textile Engineering and Research,
University of Dhaka, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2025 359
S. ul Islam and M. Shahid (eds.), Green Materials for Active Food Packaging,
Engineering Materials, [Link]
360 G. F. I. Toki et al.

11.1 Introduction

Food packaging technology is quite advanced, drawing on many different branches

of science to accomplish many goals that go well beyond the original intent of
preventing spoilage and damage to food as it travels from agriculture to the table.
Aesthetics play a significant role in motivating consumers to purchase food products,
for instance. Increasing the variety and quantity of meals given to consumers is one
strategy employed by the food industry to boost profits. Because of this, there is a
greater need for foods that can be stored for extended periods without significantly
compromising their quality [1]. To ensure that food products maintain their quality
throughout their entire lifecycle, from storage to transit to delivery and consumption,
a complex system is in place, the most basic part of which is packaging. Preventing
or slowing down chemical, biochemical, and microbiological degradation as well as
mechanical damage to the payload is the primary goal of packing [2]. Not only does
the package show the product’s shape, size, color, and consistency, but it also provides
information about the product’s nutritional value and calorie content [3]. Many now
consider plastics made from petroleum to be one of the utmost serious alarms to our
surrounding environment. Businesses in this sector are working on solutions, such as
new packaging technologies and biodegradable food packaging [4, 5]. Figure 11.1
shows the life cycles of various environmentally friendly packaging materials.
Innovative packaging solutions like smart food packaging can not only make
sense, but also record fluctuations in quality, both inside and externally about the
product’s surroundings, and then communicate this information to the consumer
effectively. One famous specimen of smart “interactive” food packaging is active and
intelligent packaging (IP). IP includes active components that help enhance the shelf
lifespan and preserve product eminence, while intelligent systems use indicators,
sensors, and data carriers to convey information about the product’s freshness during
transit [6, 7]. The capability to perceive deviations in storage conditions (for instance
changes in temperature or humidity) and prevent quality degradation is a remarkable
feature. Intelligent electronics were integrated with active packaging components like
antioxidants, humidity, carbon dioxide (CO2 ), antibacterial mediators, emitters, and
ethylene, along with oxygen scavengers to create the concept of “smart packaging”
[8, 9]. Various devices can be unified into such packaging to regulate the temperature
of the food within and provide real-time nutritional data on an electronic screen [10].
There are several sophisticated methods available for detecting harmful bacteria
and other pollutants. Some of these devices necessitate the extraction of samples
to determine whether the target contaminant is present. Detecting pollutants or
pathogens is still a restricted application of these devices due to technological limita-
tions in incorporating them into commodity packaging [11]. The perfect sensor would
have these features: Superior selectivity, Extreme sensitivity to variations in bacterial
concentrations, Quick response time, Extended shelf life, and Compact and afford-
able [2, 12]. One kind of sensor is the biosensor, which can detect biological reactions.
It combines an electrochemical, optical, or acoustic transducer with a bioreceptor for
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 361

Fig. 11.1 The eco-friendly influence of packaging throughout time. Republished with the permis-
sion of Elsevier [5]. Copyright Elsevier, 1998

an analyte—an antigen, microbe, enzyme, nucleic acid, or hormone—to alter biolog-

ical signals into quantifiable and visible responses [13, 14]. The parameters that need
to be analyzed dictate the type of necessary transducer. Among a biosensor’s most
critical qualities are its specificity, sensitivity, longevity, mobility, and use [15, 16].
Optical sensors that specifically target natural amines in beer have also been devel-
oped; these work by utilizing the covalent contact between the tryptamine molecule
and its active vinyl groups [17]. One type of biosensor can detect biogenic amines
produced by amino acid decarboxylation or the amination and the transformation of
ketones and aldehydes. Another type of biosensor can detect xanthine, a byproduct
of adenine nucleotide destruction in bodily tissue, thru immobilizing xanthine oxide
onto transducer electrodes [13].
This chapter aims to deliver a concise synopsis of the “Smart Sensors for Quality
Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions” from the outset. In this context, first,
explain Green Packaging and its Sustainability. Next, the categories of quality moni-
toring, for instance, O2 , CO2 , Chemical, pH, humidity, time and temperature, and
so on, are discussed. Since this chapter focuses on smart sensors for quality moni-
toring, it will include a quick brief on quality monitoring in packing and a smart
sensor overview. Finally, the challenges and prospects of using smart sensors for
quality monitoring in green packaging are summarized.
362 G. F. I. Toki et al.

11.2 Green Packaging and Sustainability

The concept of green packaging, characterized by its reliance on renewable resources

and sustainable design, is experiencing a surge in popularity. However, skepticism
surrounds products labeled as “green” due to doubts about their true ecological
integrity [18, 19]. In green packaging design, functionality is just one considera-
tion among many. It seeks to minimize energy consumption and package size while
maximizing effectiveness, often aided by tools like computer-aided design and frame-
works such as the Sustainable Packaging Design Model (SPkDM) [20, 21]. Material
selection plays a vital role in reducing environmental impact. Retailers are increas-
ingly integrating sustainability into their packaging strategies, emphasizing the status
of energy-efficient manufacture and the safety of ingredients for both the environment
and human health [63]. Studies explore the risks associated with recycled materials in
food packaging and investigate alternatives like bio-based and novel materials such
as cellulose nanofibrils and bioplastics [22, 23]. Various sustainable materials are
being explored, including recyclable options like paper-based packaging and novel
materials like chitosan and soy protein isolate films. Printing directly onto packaging
surfaces is also emerging as a method to reduce paper usage [24–26]. Sustainable
packaging should address economic, social, and environmental concerns. It can lead
to cost savings, stronger stakeholder relationships, and reduced energy consumption
and waste. However, challenges persist, including the prioritization of aesthetics
over sustainability and limitations due to insufficient knowledge or funding [27, 28].
Measuring sustainability through Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) ensures that
packaging meets its purpose efficiently and safely while minimizing environmental
harm [29].
The escalating consumption of packaged food, increasing annually by 5%, has
resulted in a notable surge in packaging waste. Despite packaging offering advan-
tages such as providing information, safeguarding products, and prolonging their
shelf life, its environmental repercussions across its lifecycle are alarming [30, 31].
Conventional packaging, often dependent on non-renewable materials like plastics,
contributes significantly to environmental issues: the extraction of raw materials
for packaging consumes extensive energy and exhausts finite resources [32, 33].
The manufacturing process of packaging emits substantial greenhouse gases, exac-
erbating climate change. A considerable amount of packaging ends up in landfills,
where it takes centuries to degrade, exacerbating landfill overflow. Plastic pack-
aging is a primary culprit, polluting oceans and ecosystems, harming wildlife, and
infiltrating the food chain. Some conventional packaging materials contain harmful
chemicals that can seep into soil and water, potentially contaminating ecosystems and
affecting human health [34, 35]. These adverse effects underscore the urgent neces-
sity for transitioning towards sustainable packaging practices prioritizing renew-
able materials, waste reduction, and minimizing the environmental impact of the
packaging industry [36, 37]. Plastic is extensively utilized due to its versatility and
cost-effectiveness. However, its widespread adoption has resulted in; global plastic
production has soared, reaching 381 million tonnes in 2015. Most plastic packing is
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 363

discarded within a year, posing a noteworthy solid leftover topic, mostly when not
adequately managed. Consumers often associate plastics with adverse environmental
consequences, notably plastic pollution in marine environments. While Life Cycle
Assessments (LCA) can quantify the ecological influence of various packing ingre-
dients, disparities in methodology and system boundaries complicate comparisons.
International policies such as bans on single-use plastics and initiatives for mini-
mizing plastic waste are imperative. Bioplastics derived from renewable sources
offer promise, although constraints exist. Approximately half of bioplastics are
non-biodegradable and pose similar environmental risks as conventional plastics.
Biodegradable bioplastics often necessitate specific composting conditions, which
many consumers are unaware of leading to improper disposal [38].
Sustainable packaging is a crucial aspect of various industries, aiming to mini-
mize environmental impact while ensuring product protection. This concept encom-
passes three foremost scopes, for instance, the economy, the environment, and human
well-being. Ideally, sustainable packaging should contribute to a fairer distribution of
resources and maintain a healthy ecosystem [39, 40]. From an ecological perspective,
materials like glass are often considered more sustainable than plastic or aluminum
cans due to their reusability. However, plastic remains the most extensively utilized
packaging material as a result of its lightweight nature, lower rate, and moldability
[41]. A shift towards material recycling, reuse, and the development of bio-based
as well as ecological materials is necessary to achieve true sustainability. Packaging
is vital in product protection, storage, and delivery, but its production and disposal
significantly affect the environment. Studies have shown that packaging contributes
to greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion, and pollution. Single-use plastics,
for instance, pose a particular threat due to their extensive use and long lifespan in
landfills [42]. Many countries and organizations are implementing regulations and
initiatives to promote sustainable packaging. The European Union (EU), for example,
has restricted the usage of only-usage plastics, while country like Pakistan is progres-
sively shifting towards executing the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, focusing
on waste collection, recycling, and infrastructure development [43, 44]. Despite its
benefits like extended shelf life, multi-layered packaging presents challenges in recy-
cling due to the complexity of separating its various materials. Regulations are being
enforced to limit its use and encourage the adoption of more recyclable alternatives
like polyolefins [45, 46]. The concept of green packaging emphasizes the use of
eco-friendly materials that minimize waste and pollution. This approach is gaining
traction due to growing consumer awareness and regulations imposed by authori-
ties. However, implementing green packaging strategies often requires overcoming
obstacles related to cost, technological advancements, and human resource skillsets.
Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) integrates ecological considerations
throughout the supply chain, encompassing production, packaging, and logistics.
Green supply chain management (GSCM) takes this a step further, directing to lessen
the ecological impact of an entire organization’s operations [47]. Reusable pack-
aging, particularly plastic packaging, is being increasingly utilized for its efficiency
and cost-effectiveness in reverse logistics. Solid waste management (SWM) remains
364 G. F. I. Toki et al.

a critical challenge, requiring collaborative efforts from governments, communi-

ties, and industries to implement effective solutions [46]. Sustainable packaging is a
complex concept that necessitates a holistic approach considering its environmental,
economic, and social impacts throughout the supply chain. Continuous research and
development in material science, recycling technologies, and consumer education
are crucial for achieving a sustainable packaging future [48, 49].

11.3 Quality Monitoring in Packaging

11.3.1 O2 Detectors

Modified atmosphere packaging (MAP) has emerged as an extensively utilized

methodology for prolonging the shelf life of diverse foodstuffs [50]. This technique
entails enclosing the product within a meticulously regulated gas adsorption, typi-
cally displacing most atmospheric air with a blend of O2 , N2 , and CO2 . Precise moni-
toring of O2 concentrations within MAPs is imperative, prompting the development
of various sensor technologies (Fig. 11.2) [51]. One variant of the O2 sensor employs
luminescent probe molecules incorporated into a gas-permeable material, forming
thin film structures. Despite reacting to O2 exposure by modulating their photolumi-
nescence, the resultant alterations often evade direct visual detection, necessitating
specialized and costly analytical instrumentation [51].
Conversely, colorimetric redox-based indicator sensors offer a more straightfor-
ward solution grounded in reversible redox chemistry. These configurations, exem-
plified by the Ageless Eye, typically include a redox dye (e.g., methylene blue)
in addition to a potent reducing agent (for instance, glucose in an alkaline milieu)
[52–54]. These sensors change color with even slight fluctuations in O2 levels, tran-
sitioning from purple to pink at O2 concentrations as low as 0.1% and reverting to
purple in the presence of elevated O2 levels [55]. However, these systems mandate
anaerobic storage and handling, as their efficacy rapidly diminishes upon exposure to
ambient air [55]. A separate category of oxygen sensors utilizes phosphorescent dyes
encapsulated within a permeable polymeric matrix, facilitating interaction with O2
molecules. Although capable of detecting O2 depletion within the enclosure, these
sensors exhibit constraints akin to their luminescent counterparts [56].
Researchers have endeavored to mitigate the drawbacks of colorimetric systems by
devising light-triggered, redox dye-based sensors. These setups incorporate photo-
sensitive dyes necessitating UV or visible light activation for functionality [51].
Nonetheless, a significant drawback of this approach is the potential migration of
redox dyes from the water-insoluble polymer film into the food, posing contam-
ination and discoloration risks [57, 58]. To counter this concern, one study have
fruitfully employed alginate polymers, which bind to the redox dyestuff, forestalling
their release upon exposure to water [59]. MAP technology assumes a pivotal role in
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 365

Fig. 11.2 a A colorimetric redox dye-based O2 sensor, b)Color changes for various CO2 levels from
0 to 23%, c a colorimetric CO2 sensor utilizing a food-grade combination composed of an amino
acid (l-lysine), a polypeptide (poly l-lysine, EPL), and naturally occurring colors (anthocyanins).
Republished with permission from ACS [52]. Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society

upholding food quality [60, 61]. Various sensor types have been devised for moni-
toring O2 levels within MAPs, each harboring distinct advantages and constraints.
While luminescent sensors offer heightened sensitivity, their detection necessitates
specialized apparatus [51, 62–64]. Colorimetric redox sensors furnish a simpler alter-
native but mandate specific storage and handling protocols. Light-activated systems
and phosphorescent sensors entail additional limitations concerning dye migration
[65, 66]. Recent strides employing alginate polymers hold promise in addressing dye
migration concerns, thereby enhancing O2 monitoring within MAPs [53].
366 G. F. I. Toki et al.

11.3.2 CO2 Detectors

Optical sensors designed for sensing CO2 levels in the context of food pack-
aging can be considered into two basic kinds. For instance, luminescent dye-based
sensors undergo a fluorescence change when they come into contact with CO2 , and
colorimetric indicators rely on pH indicators to generate significant color changes
[67–69].
To effectively utilize luminous dyes, sophisticated equipment is necessary for
both stimulating and detecting the light emitted by the dyes. This includes portable
instrumentation and handheld scanning devices. Although luminous dyes provide
excellent analytical performance, their deployment is not without difficulties [70–
72]. Researchers pioneered the development of this technology. The addition of
HPTS (8-Hydroxypyrene-1,3,6-trisulfonic acid) onto a plastic sheet was the method
they used to achieve it [73]. Consequently, a fluorometric CO2 sensor was developed
with a rapid response and restoration time. Scientists improved the HPTS system’s
stability by immobilizing the fluorophore molecule in a hydrophobic progressively
altered silica (ormosil) matrix and enhancing sensitivity using a dual luminophore
referencing system [71]. It is crucial to remember that the chemical constituents
utilized in sensor production are not suitable for food consumption. Consequently, it
is essential to take strict procedures to avoid the sensors from contacting food items
[70].
Recent research on CO2 sensors for food packaging has primarily focused on
using colorimetric indicators [68]. While bright dyes have higher sensitivity, these
indicators have relatively lower sensitivity. However, they have several advantages,
including using more affordable components and eliminating the requirement for
additional instrumentation instruments. Colorimetric pH dyestuff, for instance, m-
cresol purple, have produced thin, vibrant plastic films that exhibit color changes
when protonated or deprotonated [74]. Water-based systems provide excellent dura-
bility, especially for products that prerequisite to be kept at a humidity and temper-
ature level that can be accurately regulated [70]. Furthermore, empirical designs
utilizing food-grade blends have been validated, rendering them appropriate for mass
production of labels that offer customers clear indications about food preservation.
However, CO2 leak indicators often exhibit less reliability than O2 gas sensors.
This occurs when food undergoes CO2 absorption in the initial days of storage,
resulting in a reduced CO2 content in the headspace. This behavior is particularly rele-
vant to active pharmaceutical administration (MAP), where the package is initially
flushed. Conversely, the metabolic activity of microbes could lead to a rise in CO2
levels, potentially masking signs of leaks. Commercially accessible CO2 -sensitive
MAP indicators, including plastic optical fluorescent films, may demonstrate irreg-
ular reversibility due to oxygen consumption caused by microbial growth. This can
lead to compromised package integrity and the indication color remaining unaltered,
creating the perception that the package is still intact even if it has spoiled [55].
The fluctuations in CO2 levels during storage are the main factor contributing to
the perception that CO2 readings are often less reliable than O2 indicators. However,
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 367

CO2 indicators are still utilized to detect leaks. Furthermore, the metabolic activity
of bacteria might lead to misleading signals, adding complexity to the assessment of
detection precision. Several factors must be considered when using O2 and CO2 indi-
cators to identify leaks in MAP [52]. The challenges associated with O2 indicators
are their poor sensitivity, the complexity of handling, the lack of clear color change
in the presence of acidic CO2 , and the undesired reversibility [52, 75]. Although
many advanced platforms are now technologically advanced for detecting contami-
nants and pathogens, most of these platforms necessitate the extraction of samples
to identify specific molecules. Regarding food packaging applications, the main
emphasis is on identifying the development of microbiological contamination. This
necessitates incorporating integration within the package, clear-cut reactions that
are readily distinguishable, and cost-effective manufacturing. Tracking alterations in
the gas composition of a package due to microbial growth can provide as an indi-
rect means of identifying microbial contamination. Gas sensors can be employed to
achieve this objective [76]. The rise in CO2 concentration can function as a signal of
contamination or the presence of pathogens in packages that do not employ CO2 as a
protective gas. However, the detection of CO2 has challenges in accurately detecting
the proliferation of microbes in MAPs [76].

11.3.3 Specific Chemicals and pH Changes that Indicate

Spoilage

Researchers have developed colorimetric assays to detect spoilage in fish, an alterna-

tive to relying solely on our senses. Researchers engineered an indicator comprising
a specialized polymeric film that changes color upon contact with amines, indi-
cating fish spoilage [77]. Another study used 16 color-changing compounds to detect
spoilage chemicals, including trimethylamine and cadaverine [78]. Negative controls
like hexanal in fresh fish were included to differentiate between fresh and spoiled
products. While certain dyes exhibited stronger reactions to specific spoilage chem-
icals, additional dyes accommodate the variability in food spoilage, enhancing the
sensor system’s capacity to detect a comprehensive variety of spoilage mixes and
bolstering quality control and food safety measures [79].
In tandem with colorimetric assays, electrochemical sensors offer another avenue
for detecting volatile amines [79]. A sensor employing a hydrogel-coated pH elec-
trode proficient of nursing the amount of essential volatile compounds in the air
was developed. This wireless, cost-effective sensor relies on measuring changes in
resonance frequency influenced by the volatile amine concentration [80]. Similar
sensors are being developed for chicken, pork, and beef by directly incorporating
pH-sensitive materials into packaging. These sensors exploit the alteration in air
composition resulting from spoilage, detectable through pH changes [2, 81]. Spoilage
in fruits, like fish and meat, can also be discerned using chemical sensors, particularly
368 G. F. I. Toki et al.

pH sensors, which enable real-time monitoring of fruit freshness without compro-

mising the product. Sealed fruit packages undergo pH changes over time, detectable
by pH sensors utilizing indicator dyes responsive to acids or bases. As fruits spoil,
they release distinct volatile organic compounds, detectable by pH sensors, offering
a profitable, subtle, and user-friendly technique for monitoring packaged fruit fresh-
ness [82]. Certain studies have employed pH sensors to detect specific chemicals like
glutaraldehyde and formaldehyde emitted by spoiled fruits [51, 83, 84].
Chemical sensors, or receptors, are engineered to detect specific chemicals or
gases through surface adsorption, translating their presence into measurable signals.
Depending on their power requirements, sensors are classified as active or passive
[85, 86]. Carbon-based nanomaterials, counting graphene, nanoparticles, in addi-
tion, nanotubes, are frequently employed in chemical sensors owing to their excep-
tional mechanical and electrical properties and large surface area [85]. These nano-
based sensors facilitate the detection of pathogens, contaminants, spoilage, and
product tampering, with recent advancements incorporating optical transducers,
which eschew electricity and can be remotely read using visible or infrared light [87–
89]. While the silicon (Si)-based optical transducers are integrated circuits embedded
in Si semiconducting material [90].
Similar to Time–Temperature Indicators (TTIs) for fish and meat, inexpensive
and straightforward chemical sensors have been devised to monitor fish freshness
without product damage. These sensors exploit the increase in pH within sealed fish
packages as spoilage occurs, detectable by pH indicator sensors employing dyes
responsive to acids or bases. As fish spoil, they release volatile amines, detected by
pH sensors typically incorporating a pH-sensitive dyestuff in a polymer medium.
This dye changes color in response to volatile compounds emitted during spoilage,
jointly acknowledged as total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N) [91].

11.3.4 Humidity Sensors

Humidity sensors are utilized to detect the moisture amount in food wrapping in real
time. Their purpose is to maintain optimal conditions and prolong the shelf life of
the food. Ensuring the humidity levels in food packing are at their best is crucial
for preventing rotting and preserving the eminence of the product. The demand for
extended shelf life in packaged goods has been directed to the creation of advanced
humidity sensors for the purpose of real-time observation (Fig. 11.3) [92–95]. Tan
et al. investigated using an economical substance for a wireless sensor intended for
on-site measurement of moisture levels in dry food packaging [95]. The sensor incor-
porates a flat coil and capacitor onto a paper base strategically positioned taking place
the inside surface of the packaging. As the level of humidity rises, which is frequently
an indication of a decline in food quality, the paper material absorbs water vapor. The
absorption modifies the capacitance of the capacitor and, consequently, the sensor’s
resonant frequency. The resonant frequency is determined via wireless measure-
ment techniques by examining the impedance detected in the linked coil. Feng et al.
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 369

suggested including a humidity sensor in a completely printed Radio Frequency

Identification (RFID) tag [77]. A related study examined the effects of different
humidity levels (ranging from 20 to 70%) on five types of paper substrates [52]. The
paper substrates provide a cost-effective medium while retaining good sensitivity
and appropriate reaction times. The sensor tag utilizes two planar inductor-capacitor
resonators that exploit inductive coupling for wireless functionality. One resonator
utilizes distinct frequency spectrum characteristics to encode the identification data,
while the other is the humidity-based sensor. The sensing device corresponds to the
principle elucidated, in which alterations in the dielectric constant of the substrate
caused by fluctuations in humidity are manifested in the resonant frequency [96,
97]. Measurements are acquired by wireless means by utilizing a copper (Cu) loop
antenna that is coupled to a vector network analyzer (VNA) which functions as the
reader antenna. Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) was found to be the most suited
substrate among those examined, mostly because of its reduced water absorption
[93]. Alternatively, another resonant structure served as a precise humidity sensor by
detecting variations in resonant frequency caused by humidity [98, 99]. These sensor
systems are especially suitable for dry packaged goods such as cereals and fried/baked
snacks, where it is vital to maintain low moisture levels to preserve the product’s
quality. Using cost-effective manufacturing methods indicates that these sensors are
suitable for commercial use. Nevertheless, additional investigation is required to
enhance the efficiency of humidity sensors and achieve the highest possible shelf-
life extension. Recently, there has been a significant increase in research efforts to
develop humidity sensors for the purpose of real-time monitoring in food packaging
[100]. These sensors possess the unique benefits of being simple and easily inte-
grated into packaging systems. By means of a planar capacitor and inductor on a
paper substratum created a cost-effective wireless humidity sensor. This sensor may
be easily integrated into packages. Paper substrates provide a cost-efficient medium
while maintaining a high level of sensitivity and a fair amount of time for reaction
[92]. Once the moisture inside the wrapping increases, the paper substrate absorbs
water vapor, which in turn alters the capacitance of the capacitor [96, 97].
Photonic crystal-based humidity sensing materials have become a subject of
considerable investigation due to their notable sensitivity, affordability, and efficient
manufacture, making them appealing for real-time food-packing monitoring [101–
103]. The humidity sensors stated above display huge possibility for usage in dry
food packaging, where preventing product degradation relies on avoiding moisture
and maintaining extremely low humidity levels. These systems are very appropriate
for extensive commercial applications because of their ease of manufacture and
cost-effectiveness.
370 G. F. I. Toki et al.

Fig. 11.3 a An LC-type humidity sensor positioned on the inner wall of the packaging offers a
wireless response detected by a dedicated coil connected to the sensor reader unit, b Wireless
in-package humidity monitoring system. Reproduced from Ref. [92], Copyright CC-BY terms,
2007

11.4 Time−Temperature Sensors

TTIs are an essential technology in the food sector. They deliver a visual representa-
tion of a product’s temperature times gone by (Fig. 11.4). These devices operate by
converting temperature exposure into at least one detectable and lasting alteration,
accomplished through several methods such as physical changes, chemical reactions,
electrochemical responses, enzymatic processes, or even microbial activity [104,
105]. The “Fresh Check” indication (TempTime Corporation, USA) is a commer-
cially accessible TTI system with a solid-state polymerization process. This tech-
nique utilizes a thin layer of acetylenic monomer, which is transparent and lacks
color initially. However, with time, it undergoes a chemical change and transforms
into a polymer that is highly colored and opaque. The rate of this polymerization
reaction is directly affected by the temperature to which the sensor is subjected [106].
TTI sensors are classified according to their level of contact with the food product.
Temperature fluctuations can cause many alterations in food, such as mechanical,
chemical, electrochemical, enzymatic, or microbiological changes. Therefore, these
sensors provide essential information about patterns of food spoilage [107–109].
TTIs can be classified into three core divisions, such as critical time–temperature
indicators, complete history indicators, and critical temperature indicators [106].
Critical temperature indicators exclusively give evidence about the degradation of a
product and changes in its sensory characteristics resulting from temperature varia-
tions beyond a predetermined threshold within a specified time. These sensors usually
depend on irreversible color changes that are visually noticeable in the indication
(Fig. 11.4a). Figure 11.4a illustrates a temperature sensor system that relies on an
enzyme activity. Thermal exposure causes a sensitive patch to change color, and if
it turns orange, it indicates that the product has been compromised [110].
Critical time–temperature indicators provide comprehensive information about
the combined influence of time and temperature on the excellence or safety of a
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 371

Fig. 11.4 a Biosensor for critical temperature monitoring with spoilage detection. b Time-
integrating critical temperature indicator for threshold breach duration. Republished with permission
from the American Chemical Society [52]. Copyright American Chemical Society, 2019

product. This information is particularly relevant when the product is exposed to

temperatures over a specific threshold for a specified period of time. Figure 11.4b
displays a commercially accessible crucial TTI device used to observe frozen food
goods. If the threshold temperature is exceeded, a blue hue will be displayed in the
viewing window of this system. The evolution of the blue hue along the time markers
represents the duration of one or more breaches [111].
Ultimately, comprehensive historical indicators consistently observe and docu-
ment variations in temperature that a sample experiences. Subsequently, this data is
transformed into permanent alterations that convey information on the quality and
safety of food to consumers [112–114].

11.4.1 Biosensors for Bacteria Detection

Microbial proliferation has a double impact on food quality. Firstly, the abundance
of naturally existing bacteria affects the microbiological quality of the product and is
linked to its deterioration. Furthermore, the proliferation of harmful bacteria, which
are frequently introduced due to improper handling or contamination at diverse
points in the food manufacturing procedure, presents substantial health hazards
(such as pathogenic strains of E. coli) [115]. Today, Bacteria are one of the main
reasons for foodborne losses and diseases, emphasizing their importance as a focus
for monitoring food safety [116]. Conventional procedures for detecting bacteria
mostly depend on advanced laboratory technologies such nucleic acid amplification,
bacterial culture, colony counting, and immunological analysis. Although these tech-
nologies provide outstanding sensitivity, they are typically laborious and not easily
accessible for mass utilization [117–119]. Lately, scientists have concentrated on
372 G. F. I. Toki et al.

creating bacterial detection technologies that are user-friendly and simply under-
standable, with low need for user involvement. Nevertheless, most of these gadgets
are harmful and need the food item to be opened for analysis [120].
Lateral-flow immunoassays (LFIAs) are a method used to achieve user-
friendliness. These assays entail combining bacterial cells with antibody-conjugated
colloidal gold (Au) or palladium nanoparticles (PdNPs) and then putting the resulting
mixture on a test strip. The complexes are propelled along the strip by capillary
action and then collected by another immobilized antibody. This interaction leads to
the formation of a discernible colored line or spot, which serves as evidence of the
existence of bacteria (Fig. 11.5a). This technique provides a quick (about 15 min)
and equipment-free way for identifying bacteria, specifically Listeria monocytogenes
and Klebsiella bacterium [121–123]. Portable microfluidic devices provide an addi-
tional means for detecting germs. These devices, as demonstrated [124], consist of a
surface coated with gold that has been modified with antibodies capable of reacting to
certain antigens of E. coli. Bacterial aggregation can then be observed using bright-
field microscopy. The used the method of attaching E. coli-specific antibodies to Au
surfaces. It also included sensor chips to measure electrochemical signals in real-time
(Fig. 11.5b) [125].
Basu et al. have established a sensor for detecting E. coli that is made from flex-
ible acetate sheets containing graphene. This sensor employs electrodes for detec-
tion, utilizing graphene nanosheets that may capture E. coli bacteria and induce a
noticeable alteration in impedance spectroscopy [126]. DuVall et al. [127] created a
smartphone app that examines the clustering of paramagnetic silica beads to iden-
tify the existence of bacteria. This technique entails rupturing bacterial cells and
subsequently utilizing loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) to amplify
specific DNA strands.
Following the amplification of DNA, there is a following effect where the DNA
causes the beads to come together and form aggregates, as seen in Fig. 11.5c [128].
Yoon, Lee, and Park investigated the application of laser speckle decorrelation to
display the attendance of microbes in tissues. A static speckle pattern is observed
when a laser is reflected off uncontaminated food samples in a static turbid medium.
Nevertheless, the existence of living microbes generates a fluctuating speckle pattern
that may be measured to assess the extent of contamination (Fig. 11.5d) [129].
Although these methods show advancements in user-friendly bacterial identifica-
tion and their potential utility in monitoring food quality, they frequently necessitate
user involvement and the employment of intricate laboratory-based methodologies.
Methods for example microcontact printing, automated printers, and surface func-
tionalization, have been intensively studied to create patterns and add functionality
to surfaces to detect certain cells [130].
In a recent study, Yousefi et al. [130] introduced a significant breakthrough: a
straightforward device capable of detecting E. coli that can be simply merged into
food packing (Fig. 11.5e). This device shows great promise in identifying specific
bacteria in food models without the introduction of the box. This is a significant
achievement in advancing smart packaging sensors [130].
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 373

Fig. 11.5 a Lateral-flow test strip (LFT) schematic: A visible line in the testing zone specifies target
bacteria, b Microfluidic device with a gold sensor chip for real-time electrochemical detection of
E. coli using immobilized specific antibodies, c Paramagnetic silica bead aggregation intensifies
upon target bacteria DNA detection, d Laser speckle imaging detects microscopic movement. A
static, unmoving sample (like tissue) produces a static speckle pattern, while the presence of live
microorganisms causes a dynamic, fluctuating pattern, e A DNAzyme sensor embedded in a cyclo-
olefin polymer (COP) food wrap detects E. coli through a fluorescence signal increase. Republished
with permission from American Chemical Society [52]. Copyright American Chemical Society,
2019

11.5 Smart Sensors: An Overview

The development of food packaging, shifting from basic safeguarding to sophisti-

cated monitoring, represents a notable advancement in meeting customers changing
needs in the food sector. In the past, packaging materials were mostly selected based
374 G. F. I. Toki et al.

on their capacity to provide convenience and prevent harmful interactions with the
food contents. In the 20th century, significant advancements in packaging tech-
nology occurred, which introduced systems that incorporated antibacterial agents
and oxygen-absorbing components. These advancements establish higher bench-
marks for extending food’s storage duration and protecting it from external factors,
sometimes called “active packaging” [131]. However, the food and beverage pack-
aging industry continues to experience ongoing challenges due to global trends such
as the increasing use of industrialized food processing, the rise in import and export
operations related to food products, and the growing desire for faster meal preparation
times. These factors encourage the investigation of advanced and complex packaging
options designed to satisfy the increasing customer demand for healthier, safer, func-
tional, and economically sustainable processed meals while still prioritizing conve-
nience. While the traditional perception of food packaging focused on protecting and
preserving the product, promoting convenience has quickly become just as impor-
tant. In modern food packaging design, factors such as traceability, tamper-proof
features, and sustainability have become crucial considerations [132–134].
This discussion explores the idea and foundations of “smart” or “intelligent”
packaging, with specific importance on incorporating sensor technology to enhance
the safety and quality of food [135, 136].

11.5.1 Smart Packaging Principle

Smart packaging represents a substantial advancement in the packaging sector, incor-

porating various features customized to suit the product being packaged. This tech-
nology is utilized in many industries such as food & beverage, pharmaceuticals,
health products, and household items. Although the future holds great promise for
even more complex capabilities, the current and upcoming functionalities of smart
packaging can be broadly classified as follows:
1. Preserving Integrity and Prolonging Shelf-Life: Intelligent packaging actively
preserves the quality of products and inhibits food spoilage, thereby increasing
the duration for which they can be stored. This can entail using oxygen scavengers
to restrict oxidation or antimicrobial coatings to counteract detrimental microbes.
2. Improving Product Characteristics: Smart packaging has the ability to enhance
various product attributes, including color, taste, flavor, scent, texture, and
viscosity. Controlled-release methods can potentially govern the ripening process
of fruits or vegetables.
3. Adaptable to Environmental Changes: Intelligent packaging has the capability to
actively react to fluctuations in the product or its surrounding atmosphere. This
could entail the use of thermochromic indicators that undergo a color change in
the presence of high temperatures, so guaranteeing the safety of consumers.
4. Expository Communication: Intelligent packaging has the ability to convey vital
information to consumers regarding the product, its past, or its present state. One
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 375

possible approach is to utilize printed signs that visually represent the freshness
levels of the products, or to incorporate QR codes that can be scanned to get
comprehensive information about the products.
5. Assistance with Opening and Ensuring Seal Integrity: Intelligent packaging can
aid in the process of opening the package and offer visual indicators to verify the
integrity of the seal, so ensuring the security and freshness of the goods.
6. Measures to prevent counterfeiting and theft: Intelligent packaging can be inte-
grated with functionalities to authenticate products, impede counterfeiting, and
discourage theft. This could entail the utilization of embedded radio frequency
identification (RFID) tags or tamper-evident seals [137].
Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge that not all intelligent packaging solu-
tions will encompass every individual characteristic. In practical scenarios, the
primary emphasis is frequently placed on detecting and transmitting information
pertaining to the safety (indicating if food is safe or harmful) and quality (displaying
freshness, ripeness, or firmness) of a product [138, 139]. This focus on the status
of the product results in intelligent packaging that has the capability to: (a) Product
Tracking: The packaging has the capability to track the precise position of the product
at every stage of the supply chain, (b) Environmental Sensing: Sensors embedded
in the packaging can detect and measure both internal and external environmental
conditions, (c) Notify stakeholders: This data can be transmitted to manufacturers,
merchants, and customers, offering immediate and accurate knowledge on the safety
and quality of the product [140, 141].
The increasing need for extensive product information is fueling the expansion
of intelligent packing, namely in the food sector. Consumers are becoming more
inclined to comprehend component listings, storage suggestions, and instructions
for proper usage. Smart labels and stickers that employ thin-film technology can
fulfill this requirement by immediately conveying visual information to consumers
[89]. Smart packaging can incorporate disposal instructions and visual protection for
pharmaceutical and healthcare products, providing consumers with clear guidance
on how to use and dispose of them correctly. In addition, there is great potential for
developing drug delivery systems incorporated into intelligent packaging that may
transmit patient data to healthcare facilities. Wireless and electronic communication
for medicine delivery and patient data are still in the initial phases of expansion.
However, there is a possibility that they could be integrated into packaging in the
near future [142].
Another important aspect to consider is consumer confidence, especially
concerning perishable food items. The existing dependence on “best by” dates
frequently neglects to consider possible temperature variations during storage or
shipping, resulting in consumer uncertainty regarding the safety of a product [143].
In the future, there is potential for incorporating microbial growth indicators and TTIs
that rely on the chemical, physical, or enzymatic movement present in the food itself.
These developments will offer precise and unequivocal signals of product quality,
safety, and shelf-life. Scientists are currently engaged in the active development of
376 G. F. I. Toki et al.

novel TTIs, which provide a broader selection of choices for monitoring the dete-
rioration of food [142]. Smart packaging is a dynamic field that has the potential
to completely transform the way items are packaged, monitored, and delivered to
consumers. In this dynamic field, innovation will be driven by a continued emphasis
on features that improve product safety, quality, and consumer information.

11.5.2 Applications of Smart Sensors in Food Industries

[Link] Time–Temperature Indicators

Smart packaging refers to the usage of TTIs to monitor and control the tempera-
ture of products over time. TTIs are instruments that provide real-time info on the
temperature conditions that a product has been exposed to. This technology allows
for precise monitoring and ensures that products are transported and stored under
optimal temperature circumstances [142]. An innovation currently available in the
market is the integration of sensors into containers, enabling them to self-regulate
temperature by either heating or cooling. This technology transforms the containers
into “smart packaging” that informs consumers about the ideal temperature condi-
tions for the product. TTIs, which are commonly used sensors, can be exemplified
with thermochromic ink dots. These dots undergo a change in color when they reach
certain temperatures after being refrigerated or heated in a microwave. Illustrations
of this concept can be seen in pancake syrup containers that have dots to indicate the
optimal temperature for heating in a microwave, as well as in orange juice packaging
that visually shows when the refrigerated product is sufficiently cold to be consumed
[144]. The TTIs that are now accessible utilize various methods, which can be clas-
sified into three categories: chemical, physical, or biological. Chemical and physical
systems depend on reactions or alterations that are activated by time and temperature,
such as acid–base reactions, melting, or polymerization. Biological responses occur
when the biological activity of microbes, spores, or enzymes changes according to the
effects of time and temperature [142]. For example, 3 M’s MonitorMark™ provides
two options: an industrial threshold indicator and a consumer smart label. The indus-
trial variant serves as a gauge of misuse, lying dormant until a specific temperature
limit is surpassed. This technique utilizes a material that has a specified melting point
and is combined with a blue dye. A film strip is used to create a division between
the wick and a reservoir. When activated, the wick becomes visible. When exposed
to temperatures higher than its critical point, the substance will melt and spread into
the wick, causing it to turn blue. These indicators are offered in a range of critical
temperatures, spanning from −15 to 26 °C. The consumer version functions as a
semi-historical indicator, undergoing a color change when subjected to temperatures
that exceed the acceptable storage settings, and once more when the product reaches
the end of its shelf-life. The operational mechanism closely resembles that of the
industrial iteration, relying on the process of melting and diffusion of the blue dye
[145].
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 377

Commercial products exhibit an additional illustration of intelligent labels that

monitor the length of time a product has been opened or used. These labels have
the capability to measure the passage of time ranging from minutes to more than a
year, and can operate effectively under different temperature conditions. Activation
is achieved by exerting pressure on a certain button, which triggers the interaction
between a safe liquid for consumption and a unique permeable membrane inside the
Timestrip. The diffusion of the liquid through the membrane is governed by physical
rules, ensuring consistency and control. The upper surface showcases indicators
that convey the amount of time that has passed after activation, as well as an area
designated for displaying branding and other visual elements. Timestrips provide a
range of adhesive tapes on the bottom side to stick to products or packaging, meeting
specific customer requirements [142].

[Link] Sensors for Fish and Meat Freshness

While TTIs like Fresh-Check and CheckPoint offer valuable tools for estimating
fish and meat freshness, researchers are exploring alternative methods for real-time,
non-invasive monitoring. One promising approach utilizes simple and inexpensive
chemical sensors that detect changes in fish pH. As fish spoils within a sealed package,
its pH level gradually increases due to the release of basic volatile amines. These
amines can be detected by a pH-sensitive sensor, offering a simple yet effective way to
track freshness. These sensors rely on the fundamental property of pH indicator dyes,
which change color based on the surrounding environment’s acidity or alkalinity. In
practice, these sensors can be constructed by entrapping a pH-sensitive dye (such as
bromocresol green) within a polymer matrix. This dye reacts visibly to the spoilage-
related volatile compounds, contributing to a measure known as TVB-N. This system
facilitates rapid and non-invasive detection of spoilage compounds in fish through a
colorimetric (color-based) method.
It’s important to note that while pH-based sensors offer a promising approach,
researchers are exploring various freshness indicator concepts. These concepts
explore the detection of different spoilage indicators like CO2 , amines, ammonia,
ethanol, and even hydrogen sulfide (H2 S). Integrating these indicators directly into
food packaging creates visible tags that change color in response to specific analytes,
providing a convenient and easy-to-understand method for consumers to assess food
freshness [146–149].

[Link] Leak Indicators

Active packaging methods encompass MAP and equilibrium MAP, which substitute
air with precisely regulated atmospheres. Typically, this involves reducing the amount
of O2 and increasing the level of CO2 . The ideal MAP for non-respiring foods entails
of 20–80% CO2 and 0–2% O2 [150–152]. Nevertheless, detecting MAP leaks poses
a challenging task. Gas leaks alter the composition by increasing the quantity of
378 G. F. I. Toki et al.

O2 and decreasing the quantity of CO2 . The modified environment encourages the
proliferation of aerobic bacteria, leading to food spoilage. In extreme situations,
the presence of microorganisms can effectively seal breaches by sustaining elevated
amounts of carbon dioxide. [153, 154].
Hence, the algorithms used for detecting MAP leaks must be sophisticated and
give priority to detecting O2 levels over CO2 levels. Commercial O2 -sensitive indica-
tors mostly concentrate on the functionality of O2 absorbers. Mitsubishi Gas Chem-
ical markets oxygen-absorbing sachets designed to decrease the presence of oxygen.
Furthermore, Cryovac-Sealed Air Ltd. has created an indicator that may be used
to confirm the gas composition of a package [142, 154, 155]. Visual O2 indicators
consist of redox dyes for example methylene blue, reducing agents such as sugars,
and alkaline substances such as sodium hydroxide. These items can take the form of
tablets, printed layers, or laminated film package inserts [142].
Despite its appropriateness, CO2 has downsides and absorbed by the product
once it is packaged and progressively accumulates in the space above the product
until it reaches a stable level. A significant decrease in CO2 emissions following
this initial period indicates the presence of a leak. The phenomenon known as the
Microbial Masking Effect: Leaks can result in the proliferation of microorganisms
and the generation of CO2 . The presence of CO2 may obscure the decrease in the
leak, resulting in a defective product that has normal levels of CO2 [156].
Although O2 indicators offer advantages, they also have disadvantages. Reduced
Sensitivity: highly sensitive O2 indicators may interact with small amounts of
remaining O2 (0.5–2.0%) that are occasionally present in properly sealed MAPs.
This might make the handling process more difficult and necessitate the use of
anaerobic preparation and packaging. Acidity Impact: MAPs containing CO2 gas
with an acidic nature may not exhibit a change in color of the oxygen indicator.
Reversible indicators are ineffective for detecting leaks. Microbial growth has the
ability to consume oxygen from a leak, which results in a change in the color of the
indicator and masks the process of deterioration.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of MAP leak detection is constrained by the O2 and
CO2 indicators. Scientists enhance the sensitivity, reliability, and clarity of response
to enhance the effectiveness of these food safety measures [157].

[Link] Sensors for Food Pathogens and Contaminants

The realm of food safety is witnessing a surge in innovative platforms designed

to detect pathogens and contaminants. However, the current focus leans towards
standalone devices requiring sample extraction for analysis. In the context of food
packaging, these systems primarily target microbial contaminants [158].
The challenge lies in seamlessly integrating these detection mechanisms within
the packaging itself. This ideal solution necessitates a readily noticeable response,
most likely a color change, while remaining cost-effective to manufacture. The most
probable approach involves indirectly detecting microbial growth by measuring gas
composition changes within the package, a consequence of microbial activity. This
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 379

can be achieved using gas sensors as previously mentioned [159, 160]. Unfortunately,
the number of practical packaging indicators for contaminants or pathogens remains
scarce. While monitoring CO2 levels can signal microbial growth, it becomes a
challenge in MAP where CO2 is already present in high concentrations. Therefore,
CO2 monitoring as a sole indicator is only viable for non-CO2 -containing packages
[158].
For broader detection capabilities, conducting polymer biosensors offers another
promising avenue. These sensors function by sensing gases released throughout
microbial metabolism [161, 162]. They are designed by incorporating conducting
nanoparticles into an insulating matrix, with changes in resistance correlating to
the amount of gas released. These sensors have successfully detected foodborne
pathogens by analyzing bacterial cultures [163]. Additionally, coupling such sensors
with neural networks has confirmed potential in evaluating meat freshness. The
continuous development of these innovative biosensor technologies holds immense
promise for the future of food packaging, offering a more integrated and efficient
approach to food safety.

[Link] Identification, Authentication, and Tracking

RFID tags have been used for many years to identify high-value products like elec-
tronics and clothing. These tags comprise two parts, like a microchip for processing
and storing information, and an antenna for transmitting and receiving data. A sepa-
rate reader device retrieves information from the tag, often at distances of numerous
meters liable on the radio frequency utilized. Notably, RFID tags in packaging are
passive, meaning they lack their own power source and rely on the reader’s radio
waves to transmit information [164]. The key benefit of RFID tags lies in their
ability to monitor multiple items throughout the entire supply chain. This signifi-
cantly enhances distribution speed and efficiency, especially crucial in today’s world
where raw materials travel from various regions to be processed in one location and
then distributed globally. RFID technology is envisioned to replace the widely used
barcodes of today.
Currently, silicon semiconductors are the primary material for RFID tags.
However, this may change to facilitate cheaper and easier production on various
materials. Developing printed electronics using conductive polymers and metallic
inks offers a promising alternative to traditional methods. Research institutions
and companies are actively exploring desktop inkjet printing and other high-
volume production techniques for printed electronics [161, 165]. Additionally, some
advancements are investigating the use of carbon nanotubes for RFID tag antennas
[166, 167], although this technology remains less developed than conductive inks.
Interestingly, researchers are exploring the integration of RFID tags with chemical
sensing functionalities. Prototypes for ethylene sensing (fruit ripeness) and mois-
ture detection demonstrate the potential of this technology [168, 169]. Nanotech-
nology offers a clear path for further advancements as these systems are inherently
microelectronic. Nanoscale barcodes, quantum dots, and magnetic nanoparticles are
380 G. F. I. Toki et al.

among the various systems being developed within the realm of nanotechnology.
Nanotechnology, which studies and manipulates materials at the molecular level,
has the latent to significantly reduce food spoilage and improve security throughout
production, processing, and shipping [132]. However, the widespread adoption of
such technologies in food packaging remains unclear due to cost and ease-of-use
considerations.
For RFID tags, the future holds promise beyond simple tracking. Integration
with functionalities like product authentication, anti-counterfeiting, and even theft
prevention could become commonplace.

11.6 Challenges and Future Trends

More processing involving food is possible now that modern smart green pack-
aging innovation has laid a firm groundwork. Although this technology has a lot of
promising future uses, it might also face significant difficulties as it evolves. In this
part, we will go over a few of these obstacles and the possibilities for food-smart
green packaging.
The lack of advancements in sensory technology is a major roadblock to
smart packaging’s further growth. Incorporating sensors into large-scale packaged
containers is challenging due to their size, cost, and the fact that numerous sensors
could provide reliable readings for various freshness characteristics seen in food
goods. Technologists have always been interested in finding the sweet spot where
size, mobility, and functionality meet. The food business is particularly affected
by this issue because of the demand for affordable, widely available, high-quality
goods. The expansion of sensor-related nanotechnology research might provide a
solution to this problem. These sensors may pick up on a wide range of environ-
mental factors, including air pollutants, temperature, and humidity. Plus, they can do
more intrusive tests on food quality with little to no harm to the item. Although this
technique is now unfeasible for mass-produced food packaging, it has the potential to
be commercialized for extremely precise food quality sensing with additional study
[170]. Improving food quality sensors with the ability to use active packaging tech-
nology to deploy spoiling inhibitors is a major motivation. Antimicrobial packaging
is one area that could use some improvement in this area of research. To ensure the
safety of the product, food sanitization involves eliminating any microorganisms.
Currently, most antimicrobial packaging methods rely on inorganic chemicals that
are easily accessible. Concerns about potential responses or long-term impacts arise
when artificial chemical components are used in food processing. Incorporating bio-
active substances generated from natural sources can significantly enhance these
systems [171]. Smart packaging is a system that incorporates multiple types of tech-
nology. Despite their importance for food safety, the disposal phase of packaging is
complicated by monitoring and smart packaging technologies. Neither biodegrad-
able nor readily recyclable is the majority of the material used; in fact, many package
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 381

types containing particular chemical compounds require stringent disposal regula-

tions. Research on biodegradable or recyclable materials is ongoing for use in this
technology; while it may not be possible to entirely replace all components, doing
so will greatly lessen the systems environmental effect [171]. Possibilities exist for
cutting-edge smart packaging technology to connect with third-party processors via
the Internet of Things (IoT). IoT systems rely on networks to facilitate commu-
nication and data sharing among various system components. A key feature of IoT
infrastructure is the ability for “tag” and “reader” components to transmit data in both
directions, building upon the concept of external communication offered by RFID
systems. This would allow an external unit to control the package’s circuits. Prospec-
tive growth areas in the food business also include analyzing the data received by
the sensing devices [172]. Future smart packaging solutions may incorporate robust
external computing units with processing power and performance capabilities well
beyond those of traditional RFID readers. These auxiliary computing units would
receive data transmitted by sensing devices in packaging. Extracting useful informa-
tion from this data could help in forecasting food breakdown tendencies and finding
the optimal active packaging technology combination for each product. Integration
with IoT technology opens the door to consumer-oriented applications in addition to
data transmission to industrialized computers. Whether you’re at home or in the shop,
you may use an app to keep tabs on food quality and circumstances, get storage tips,
and receive specific information on packages and products. Integrating smart sensing
systems with smart computing and meeting the needs of consumers and retailers is
another potential future approach. By enhancing the evaluation of fruit quality, the
combined systems will decrease food waste and promote customer well-being [173].

11.7 Conclusion

To boost food business profits, smart package solutions have been applied in recent
years. This is accomplished by minimizing food waste caused by improper storage
or handling and increasing the amount of time that food stays fresh. Additionally,
shoppers gain since their food will always be in the best possible state of freshness
and overall quality when they take it out of the package. Due to increased consumer
expectations and longer food supply chains brought about by globalization, retail
operations have been significantly impacted. These two forces have contributed to
the development of novel packaging technologies that aim to measure and optimize
the impact of various elements on food safety and quality, as well as to track the
food’s shelf life. The technology behind smart packaging is still in its early stages
of development, and there is a lot of room for additional commercial adoption. Put
another way, there still exists a technological chasm between what could be possible
and what could be commercially viable. The use of smart packaging is significant in
three ways. TTIs and similar tools do a great job of informing buyers about the quality,
microbiological safety, and freshness of food as well as its shelf life. Data systems like
barcodes and RFID tags also improve supply chain efficiency and effectiveness by
382 G. F. I. Toki et al.

providing real-time information on goods verification and tracking. Smart packaging

materials have little commercial application while providing benefits that outweigh
the cost of service. Further acceptance can only be achieved if the gap between
lab results and practical, marketable food uses is reduced. Smart packaging has
undoubtedly shaken up the packaging business, and we can expect to see more
innovative approaches and advancements in food packaging soon.

Declaration The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal
relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Generative AI
and AI-assisted technologies have been used in the writing process to improve the readability and
language of the work only. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as
needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

7. References

1. Silvestre, C., Duraccio, D., Cimmino, S.: Food packaging based on polymer nanomaterials.
Prog. Polym. Sci. 36(12), 1766–1782 (2011). [Link]
02.003
2. Ghaani, M., Cozzolino, C.A., Castelli, G., Farris, S.: An overview of the intelligent packaging
technologies in the food sector. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 51, 1–11 (2016). [Link]
10.1016/[Link].2016.02.008
3. Ghosal, K., et al.: Electrospinning over solvent casting: tuning of mechanical properties of
membranes. Sci. Rep. 8(1), 5058 (2018). [Link]
4. Rabnawaz, M., Wyman, I., Auras, R., Cheng, S.: A roadmap towards green packaging: the
current status and future outlook for polyesters in the packaging industry. Green Chem. 19(20),
4737–4753 (2017). [Link]
5. Lörcks, J.: Properties and applications of compostable starch-based plastic material. Polym.
Degrad. Stab. 59(1), 245–249 (1998). [Link]
6. Bhardwaj, A., Alam, T., Talwar, N.: Recent advances in active packaging of agri-food products:
a review. J. Postharvest Technol. 7(1), 33–62 (2019)
7. Mia, R., Sultana, S.: Fabrication and properties of silver nanowires (AgNWs) functionalized
fabric. SN Appl. Sci. 2(12), 2052 (2020). [Link]
8. Latos-Brozio, M., Masek, A.: The application of natural food colorants as indicator substances
in intelligent biodegradable packaging materials. Food Chem. Toxicol. 135, 110975 (2020).
[Link]
9. Schaefer, D., Cheung, W.M.: Smart packaging: opportunities and challenges. Procedia CIRP
72, 1022–1027 (2018). [Link]
10. Kalpana, S., Priyadarshini, S.R., Maria Leena, M., Moses, J.A., Anandharamakrishnan, C.:
Intelligent packaging: trends and applications in food systems. Trends Food Sci. & Technol.
93, 145–157 (2019). [Link]
11. Kuswandi, B., Wicaksono, Y., Jayus, Abdullah, A., Heng, L.Y., Ahmad, M.: Smart packaging:
sensors for monitoring of food quality and safety. Sens. Instrum. Food Qual. Saf. 5(3), 137–146
(2011). [Link]
12. Zannat, A., Uddin, M.N., Mahmud, S.T., Prithu, P.S.S., Mia, R.: Textile-based soft robotics
for physically challenged individuals. J. Mater. Sci. 58, 12491–12536 (2023). [Link]
10.1007/s10853-023-08799-4
13. Biji, K.B., Ravishankar, C.N., Mohan, C.O., Srinivasa Gopal, T.K.: Smart packaging systems
for food applications: a review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 52(10), 6125–6135 (2015). [Link]
org/10.1007/s13197-015-1766-7
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 383

14. Müller, P., Schmid, M.: Intelligent Packaging in the food sector: a brief overview. Foods 8(1).
[Link]
15. Pereira de Abreu, D.A., Cruz, J.M., Paseiro Losada, P.: Active and intelligent packaging for
the food industry. Food Rev. Int. 28(2), 146–187 (2012). [Link]
2011.595022
16. Al Fahad, M.A., et al.: Pharmaceutical applications of natural dyes and pigments. In:
Renewable Dyes and Pigments, pp. 165–175. Elsevier (2024)
17. Ramon-Marquez, T., Medina-Castillo, A.L., Fernandez-Gutierrez, A., Fernandez-Sanchez,
J.F.: Novel optical sensing film based on a functional nonwoven nanofibre mat for an easy,
fast and highly selective and sensitive detection of tryptamine in beer. Biosens. Bioelectron.
79, 600–607 (2016). [Link]
18. Salwa, H., Sapuan, S., Mastura, M., Zuhri, M.: Green bio composites for food packaging. Int.
J. Recent Technol. Eng 8(2), 450–459 (2019)
19. Turjo, M.N.A., et al.: Analysis of buying perception of textile engineering students to identify
the scope of local brands in Bangladeshi apparel market. Clean. Eng. Technol. 12, 100597
(2023). [Link]
20. Olsmats, C., Dominic, C.: Packaging scorecard–a packaging performance evaluation method.
Packag. Technol. Sci. Int. J. 16(1), 9–14 (2003)
21. Bucci, D.Z., Forcellini, F.A.: Sustainable packaging design model. In: Complex Systems
Concurrent Engineering: Collaboration, Technology Innovation and Sustainability, pp. 363–
370. Springer (2007)
22. Saxena, P., Bissacco, G., Meinert, K.Æ., Bedka, F.J.: Mold design and fabrication for produc-
tion of thermoformed paper-based packaging products. J. Manuf. Process. 58, 311–321
(2020)
23. Baranitharan, P., Mahesh, G.: Alkali treated maize fibers reinforced with epoxy poly matrix
composites. Magnesium 15(30), 150 (2014)
24. Wang, H., Wang, L.: Developing a bio-based packaging film from soya by-products
incorporated with valonea tannin. J. Clean. Prod. 143, 624–633 (2017)
25. Garrido, T., Etxabide, A., Leceta, I., Cabezudo, S., De La Caba, K., Guerrero, P.: Valorization
of soya by-products for sustainable packaging. J. Clean. Prod. 64, 228–233 (2014)
26. Ahmed, T., et al.: New trends in printing applications of natural dyes and pigments. Renew.
Dye. Pigment. 139–163 (2024). [Link]
27. Sonneveld, K., James, K., Fitzpatrick, L., Lewis, H.: Sustainable packaging: how do we define
and measure it. In: 22nd IAPRI Symposium, pp. 1–9 (2005)
28. Alliance, S.P. (ed.): Towards Sustainable Packaging–A Discussion Paper. Citeseer (2002)
29. Alliance, S.P.: Principles, Strategies & KPIs for Packaging Sustainability. Dandenong,
Australia (2010)
30. Kumar, S., Deshmukh, R.: Packaged Food Market by Type (Dairy Products, Confectionery,
Packaged Produce, Bakery & Snacks, Meat, Poultry & Seafood, Ready Meals, and Others),
Sales Channel (Supermarket/Hypermarket, Specialty Stores, Grocery Stores, Online Stores,
and Others): Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast 2021–2030. Allied Market
Research (2021)
31. Mahmud, S.T., et al.: Recent developments of tin (II) sulfide/carbon composites for achieving
high-performance lithium ion batteries: a critical review. Nanomaterials 12(8), 1246 (2022).
[Link]
32. Geyer, R., Jambeck, J.R., Law, K.L.: Production, use, and fate of all plastics ever made. Sci.
Adv. 3(7), e1700782 (2017)
33. Banna, B.U., Mia, R., Hasan, M.M., Ahmed, B., Shibly, M.A.H.: Ultrasonic-assisted sustain-
able extraction and dyeing of organic cotton fabric using natural dyes from dillenia indica
leaf. Heliyon 9(8), e18702 (2023). [Link]
34. Boesen, S., Bey, N., Niero, M.: Environmental sustainability of liquid food packaging: is there
a gap between Danish consumers’ perception and learnings from life cycle assessment? J.
Clean. Prod. 210, 1193–1206 (2019)
384 G. F. I. Toki et al.

35. Lindh, H., Olsson, A., Williams, H.: Consumer perceptions of food packaging: contributing
to or counteracting environmentally sustainable development? Packag. Technol. Sci. 29(1),
3–23 (2016)
36. Narayan, R.: Carbon footprint of bioplastics using biocarbon content analysis and life-cycle
assessment. MRS Bull. 36(9), 716–721 (2011)
37. de Vargas Mores, G., Finocchio, C.P.S., Barichello, R., Pedrozo, E.A.: Sustainability and
innovation in the Brazilian supply chain of green plastic. J. Clean. Prod. 177, 12–18 (2018)
38. Neufeld, L., Stassen, F., Sheppard, R., Gilman, T.: The new plastics economy: rethinking the
future of plastics. In: World Economic Forum, vol. 7, p. 158 (2016)
39. Reichert, C.L., et al.: Bio-based packaging: materials, modifications, industrial applications
and sustainability. Polymers 12(7), 1558 (2020)
40. Álvarez-Chávez, C.R., Edwards, S., Moure-Eraso, R., Geiser, K.: Sustainability of bio-based
plastics: general comparative analysis and recommendations for improvement. J. Clean. Prod.
23(1), 47–56 (2012)
41. De Feo, G., Ferrara, C., Minichini, F.: Comparison between the perceived and actual environ-
mental sustainability of beverage packagings in glass, plastic, and aluminium. J. Clean. Prod.
333, 130158 (2022)
42. Walther, B.A., Kusui, T., Yen, N., Hu, C.-S., Lee, H.: Plastic pollution in East Asia: Macroplas-
tics and microplastics in the aquatic environment and mitigation efforts by various actors. Plast.
Aquat. Environ.-Part I Curr. Status Chall. 353–403 (2020)
43. Nourmohamadi Shalke, P., Paydar, M.M., Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M.: Sustainable supplier selec-
tion and order allocation through quantity discounts. Int. J. Manag. Sci. Eng. Manag. 13(1),
20–32 (2018)
44. Nazam, M., Xu, J., Tao, Z., Ahmad, J., Hashim, M.: A fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for the
risk assessment of green supply chain implementation in the textile industry. Int. J. Supply
Oper. Manag. 2(1), 548–568 (2015)
45. Gardas, B.B., Raut, R.D., Narkhede, B.: Identifying critical success factors to facilitate
reusable plastic packaging towards sustainable supply chain management. J. Environ. Manage.
236, 81–92 (2019)
46. Azevedo, B.D., Scavarda, L.F., Caiado, R.G.G.: Urban solid waste management in developing
countries from the sustainable supply chain management perspective: a case study of Brazil’s
largest slum. J. Clean. Prod. 233, 1377–1386 (2019)
47. Nazam, M., Hashim, M., Randhawa, M.A., Maqbool, A.: Modeling the barriers of sustainable
supply chain practices: A Pakistani perspective. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International
Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management, vol. 2 13, pp. 348–364.
Springer (2020)
48. Akmal, T., Jamil, F.: Testing the role of waste management and environmental quality on
health indicators using structural equation modeling in Pakistan. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health 18(8), 4193 (2021)
49. Kashif, M., Rani, T.: Customers’ attitude towards green packaging: a case of sapphire,
Pakistan. Journal of Marketing Strategies 3(1), 1–28 (2021)
50. Sivertsvik, M., Rosnes, J.T., Bergslien, H.: Modified atmosphere packaging. Minimal Process.
Technol. Food Ind. 61–86 (2002)
51. Mills, A.: Oxygen indicators and intelligent inks for packaging food. Chem. Soc. Rev. 34(12),
1003–1011 (2005)
52. Yousefi, H., Su, H.-M., Imani, S.M., Alkhaldi, K., Filipe, C.D.M., Didar, T.F.: Intelligent food
packaging: a review of smart sensing technologies for monitoring food quality. ACS Sens.
4(4), 808–821 (2019)
53. Smolander, M.: The use of freshness indicators in packaging. Nov. Food Packag. Tech. 127–
143 (2003)
54. Silva-Pereira, M.C., Teixeira, J.A., Pereira-Júnior, V.A., Stefani, R.: Chitosan/corn starch
blend films with extract from Brassica oleraceae (red cabbage) as a visual indicator of fish
deterioration. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 61(1), 258–262 (2015)
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 385

55. Eaton, K.: A novel colorimetric oxygen sensor: dye redox chemistry in a thin polymer film.
Sens. Actuators B Chem. 85(1–2), 42–51 (2002)
56. Banerjee, S., Kelly, C., Kerry, J.P., Papkovsky, D.B.: High throughput non-destructive assess-
ment of quality and safety of packaged food products using phosphorescent oxygen sensors.
Trends Food Sci. Technol. 50, 85–102 (2016)
57. Gillman, P.K.: CNS toxicity involving methylene blue: the exemplar for understanding and
predicting drug interactions that precipitate serotonin toxicity. J. Psychopharmacol. 25(3),
429–436 (2011)
58. Paul, P., Kumar, G.S.: Toxic interaction of thionine to deoxyribonucleic acids: elucidation of
the sequence specificity of binding with polynucleotides. J. Hazard. Mater. 184(1–3), 620–626
(2010)
59. Vu, C.H.T., Won, K.: Novel water-resistant UV-activated oxygen indicator for intelligent food
packaging. Food Chem. 140(1–2), 52–56 (2013)
60. Oliveira, M., Abadias, M., Usall, J., Torres, R., Teixidó, N., Viñas, I.: Application of modified
atmosphere packaging as a safety approach to fresh-cut fruits and vegetables–a review. Trends
Food Sci. Technol. 46(1), 13–26 (2015)
61. Zhang, M., Meng, X., Bhandari, B., Fang, Z., Chen, H.: Recent application of modified
atmosphere packaging (MAP) in fresh and fresh-cut foods. Food Rev. Intl. 31(2), 172–193
(2015)
62. Zhu, R., Desroches, M., Yoon, B., Swager, T.M.: Wireless oxygen sensors enabled by Fe(II)-
polymer wrapped carbon nanotubes. ACS Sens. 2(7), 1044–1050 (2017). [Link]
1021/acssensors.7b00327
63. Kelly, C., et al.: Extruded phosphorescence based oxygen sensors for large-scale packaging
applications. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 304, 127357 (2020)
64. Kelly, C.A., Cruz-Romero, M., Kerry, J.P., Papkovsky, D.B.: Stability and safety assessment
of phosphorescent oxygen sensors for use in food packaging applications. Chemosensors 6(3),
38 (2018)
65. Wolfbeis, O.S.: Luminescent sensing and imaging of oxygen: Fierce competition to the Clark
electrode. BioEssays 37(8), 921–928 (2015)
66. Urriza-Arsuaga, I., Ielasi, G., Bedoya, M., Orellana, G.: Luminescence-based sensors for
bioprocess applications. Fluoresc. Ind. 1–38 (2019)
67. Nopwinyuwong, A., Trevanich, S., Suppakul, P.: Development of a novel colorimetric indi-
cator label for monitoring freshness of intermediate-moisture dessert spoilage. Talanta 81(3),
1126–1132 (2010)
68. Rukchon, C., Nopwinyuwong, A., Trevanich, S., Jinkarn, T., Suppakul, P.: Development of
a food spoilage indicator for monitoring freshness of skinless chicken breast. Talanta 130,
547–554 (2014)
69. Jung, J., Puligundla, P., Ko, S.: Proof-of-concept study of chitosan-based carbon dioxide
indicator for food packaging applications. Food Chem. 135(4), 2170–2174 (2012)
70. Saliu, F., Della Pergola, R.: Carbon dioxide colorimetric indicators for food packaging appli-
cation: applicability of anthocyanin and poly-lysine mixtures. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 258,
1117–1124 (2018)
71. von Bültzingslöwen, C., et al.: Sol–gel based optical carbon dioxide sensor employing dual
luminophore referencing for application in food packaging technology. Analyst 127(11),
1478–1483 (2002)
72. Wang, J., Wen, Z., Yang, B., Yang, X.: Optical carbon dioxide sensor based on fluorescent
capillary array. Results Phys. 7, 323–326 (2017)
73. Mills, A., Chang, Q.: Fluorescence plastic thin-film sensor for carbon dioxide. Analyst 118(7),
839–843 (1993)
74. Mills, A.: Optical sensors for carbon dioxide and their applications. In: Sensors for Envi-
ronment, Health and Security: Advanced Materials and Technologies, pp. 347–370. Springer
(2009)
75. McMillin, K.W.: Where is MAP going? A review and future potential of modified atmosphere
packaging for meat. Meat Sci. 80(1), 43–65 (2008)
386 G. F. I. Toki et al.

76. Ammor, S., Tauveron, G., Dufour, E., Chevallier, I.: Antibacterial activity of lactic acid
bacteria against spoilage and pathogenic bacteria isolated from the same meat small-scale
facility: 1—screening and characterization of the antibacterial compounds. Food Control
17(6), 454–461 (2006)
77. Kuswandi, B., Restyana, A., Abdullah, A., Heng, L.Y., Ahmad, M.: A novel colorimetric
food package label for fish spoilage based on polyaniline film. Food Control 25(1), 184–189
(2012)
78. Morsy, M.K., et al.: Development and validation of a colorimetric sensor array for fish spoilage
monitoring. Food Control 60, 346–352 (2016)
79. Rawat, S.: Food spoilage: microorganisms and their prevention. Asian J. Plant Sci. Res. 5(4),
47–56 (2015)
80. Bhadra, S., Narvaez, C., Thomson, D.J., Bridges, G.E.: Non-destructive detection of fish
spoilage using a wireless basic volatile sensor. Talanta 134, 718–723 (2015)
81. Chen, H.-Z., Zhang, M., Bhandari, B., Yang, C.-H.: Development of a novel colorimetric food
package label for monitoring lean pork freshness. LWT 99, 43–49 (2019)
82. Taoukis, P., Koutsoumanis, K., Nychas, G.: Use of time–temperature integrators and predictive
modelling for shelf life control of chilled fish under dynamic storage conditions. Int. J. Food
Microbiol. 53(1), 21–31 (1999)
83. Mia, R., Mofasser, A., Bhat, M.A., Howlader, M.I., Sayed, N.I., Bakar, M.A.: Utilizing neem
wood waste as a natural dye in the development of bio-based functionalized colored jute
fabric. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 38, 101489 (2024). [Link]
84. Zannat, A., Uddin, M.N., Mahmud, S.T., Mia, R., Ahmed, T.: Natural dyes and pigments in
functional finishing. In: Renewable Dyes and Pigments, pp. 271–287. Elsevier (2024)
85. Vanderroost, M., Ragaert, P., Devlieghere, F., De Meulenaer, B.: Intelligent food packaging:
the next generation. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 39(1), 47–62 (2014)
86. Khan, M.T., Al Mamun, M.A., Rony, M., Anchang, X., Rashid, M.M.: Effect of different
solvent systems on fiber morphology and property of electrospun PCL nano fibers. Tekstil ve
Mühendis 28(122), 61–76 (2021). [Link]
87. K. Nachay, “Analyzing nanotechnology,” Food technology, vol. 61, no. 1, 2007.
88. De Azeredo, H.M.: Nanocomposites for food packaging applications. Food Res. Int. 42(9),
1240–1253 (2009)
89. Liu, Y., Chakrabartty, S., Alocilja, E.C.: Fundamental building blocks for molecular biowire
based forward error-correcting biosensors. Nanotechnology 18(42), 424017 (2007)
90. Yebo, N.A., et al.: Selective and reversible ammonia gas detection with nanoporous film
functionalized silicon photonic micro-ring resonator. Opt. Express 20(11), 11855–11862
(2012)
91. Lee, S.Y., Lee, S.J., Choi, D.S., Hur, S.J.: Current topics in active and intelligent food
packaging for preservation of fresh foods. J. Sci. Food Agric. 95(14), 2799–2810 (2015)
92. Tan, E.L., Ng, W.N., Shao, R., Pereles, B.D., Ong, K.G.: A wireless, passive sensor for
quantifying packaged food quality. Sensors 7(9), 1747–1756 (2007)
93. Feng, Y., Xie, L., Chen, Q., Zheng, L.-R.: Low-cost printed chipless RFID humidity sensor
tag for intelligent packaging. IEEE Sens. J. 15(6), 3201–3208 (2014)
94. Harrey, P., Ramsey, B., Evans, P., Harrison, D.: Capacitive-type humidity sensors fabricated
using the offset lithographic printing process. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 87(2), 226–232 (2002)
95. Courbat, J., Kim, Y., Briand, D., De Rooij, N.: Inkjet printing on paper for the realization of
humidity and temperature sensors. In: 2011 16th International Solid-State Sensors, Actuators
and Microsystems Conference, pp. 1356–1359. IEEE (2011)
96. Uematsu, M., Franck, E.: Static dielectric constant of water and steam. J. Phys. Chem. Ref.
Data 9(4), 1291–1306 (1980)
97. Amin, Y., Chen, Q., Zheng, L., Tenhunen, H.: “Green” wideband log-spiral antenna for RFID
sensing and wireless applications. J. Electromagn. Waves Appl. 26(14–15), 2043–2050 (2012)
98. Virtanen, J., Ukkonen, L., Björninen, T., Sydänheimo, L.: Printed humidity sensor for UHF
RFID systems. In: 2010 IEEE Sensors Applications Symposium (SAS), pp. 269–272. IEEE
(2010)
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 387

99. Amin, E.M., Bhuiyan, M.S., Karmakar, N.C., Winther-Jensen, B.: Development of a low cost
printable chipless RFID humidity sensor. IEEE Sens. J. 14(1), 140–149 (2013)
100. Galstyan, V., Bhandari, M.P., Sberveglieri, V., Sberveglieri, G., Comini, E.: Metal oxide
nanostructures in food applications: quality control and packaging. Chemosensors 6(2), 16
(2018)
101. Burratti, L., De Matteis, F., Casalboni, M., Francini, R., Pizzoferrato, R., Prosposito, P.:
Polystyrene photonic crystals as optical sensors for volatile organic compounds. Mater. Chem.
Phys. 212, 274–281 (2018)
102. Potyrailo, R.A., et al.: Towards outperforming conventional sensor arrays with fabricated
individual photonic vapour sensors inspired by Morpho butterflies. Nat. Commun. 6(1), 7959
(2015)
103. Yang, H., et al.: A visual water vapor photonic crystal sensor with PVA/SiO2 opal structure.
Appl. Surf. Sci. 423, 421–425 (2017)
104. Ndraha, N., Hsiao, H.-I., Vlajic, J., Yang, M.-F., Lin, H.-T.V.: Time-temperature abuse in the
food cold chain: review of issues, challenges, and recommendations. Food Control 89, 12–21
(2018)
105. Göransson, M., Nilsson, F., Jevinger, Å.: Temperature performance and food shelf-life accu-
racy in cold food supply chains–insights from multiple field studies. Food Control 86, 332–341
(2018)
106. Han, J.W., Ruiz-Garcia, L., Qian, J.P., Yang, X.T.: Food packaging: A comprehensive review
and future trends. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 17(4), 860–877 (2018)
107. Zhu, R., Desroches, M., Yoon, B., Swager, T.M.: Wireless oxygen sensors enabled by Fe
(II)-polymer wrapped carbon nanotubes. ACS Sens. 2(7), 1044–1050 (2017)
108. Tsironi, T., Stamatiou, A., Giannoglou, M., Velliou, E., Taoukis, P.S.: Predictive modelling and
selection of time temperature integrators for monitoring the shelf life of modified atmosphere
packed gilthead seabream fillets. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 44(4), 1156–1163 (2011)
109. Nuin, M., et al.: Modelling spoilage of fresh turbot and evaluation of a time–temperature
integrator (TTI) label under fluctuating temperature. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 127(3), 193–199
(2008)
110. V. S. Freshtag™.: Temperature monitoring made simple. Vitsab™ International AB,
[Link]
111. T. PLUS.: [Link] Last
accessed May 10 2024
112. Wang, S., Liu, X., Yang, M., Zhang, Y., Xiang, K., Tang, R.: Review of time temperature
indicators as quality monitors in food packaging. Packag. Technol. Sci. 28(10), 839–867
(2015)
113. Pennanen, K., et al.: European consumers’ perceptions of time–temperature indicators in food
packaging. Packag. Technol. Sci. 28(4), 303–323 (2015)
114. Choi, D.Y., Jung, S.W., Lee, D.S., Lee, S.J.: Fabrication and characteristics of microbial time
temperature indicators from bio-paste using screen printing method. Packag. Technol. Sci.
27(4), 303–312 (2014)
115. Kuchenmüller, T., Hird, S., Stein, C., Kramarz, P., Nanda, A., Havelaar, A.: Estimating the
global burden of foodborne diseases-a collaborative effort. Eurosurveillance 14(18), 19195
(2009)
116. Legese, M.H., Weldearegay, G.M., Asrat, D.: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-and
carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae among Ethiopian children. Infect. Drug Resist.
27–34 (2017)
117. Gupta, V., Gulati, P., Bhagat, N., Dhar, M., Virdi, J.: Detection of Yersinia enterocolitica in
food: an overview. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 34, 641–650 (2015)
118. Gokduman, K., Avsaroglu, M.D., Cakiris, A., Ustek, D., Gurakan, G.C.: Recombinant
plasmid-based quantitative real-time PCR analysis of Salmonella enterica serotypes and its
application to milk samples. J. Microbiol. Methods 122, 50–58 (2016)
119. Dzantiev, B.B., Byzova, N.A., Urusov, A.E., Zherdev, A.V.: Immunochromatographic
methods in food analysis. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 55, 81–93 (2014)
388 G. F. I. Toki et al.

120. Fang, Z., Zhao, Y., Warner, R.D., Johnson, S.K.: Active and intelligent packaging in meat
industry. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 61, 60–71 (2017)
121. Tominaga, T.: Enhanced sensitivity of lateral-flow test strip immunoassays using colloidal
palladium nanoparticles and horseradish peroxidase. LWT 86, 566–570 (2017)
122. Tominaga, T.: Rapid detection of Klebsiella pneumoniae, Klebsiella oxytoca, Raoultella
ornithinolytica and other related bacteria in food by lateral-flow test strip immunoassays.
J. Microbiol. Methods 147, 43–49 (2018)
123. Ramos, A.C., et al.: Evaluation of a rapid immunochromatographic test for detection of distinct
variants of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC) in Enterobacteriaceae. J. Microbiol.
Methods 142, 1–3 (2017)
124. Tokel, O., et al.: Portable microfluidic integrated plasmonic platform for pathogen detection.
Sci. Rep. 5(1), 9152 (2015)
125. Altintas, Z., Akgun, M., Kokturk, G., Uludag, Y.: A fully automated microfluidic-based
electrochemical sensor for real-time bacteria detection. Biosens. Bioelectron. 100, 541–548
(2018)
126. Basu, P.K., et al.: Graphene based E. coli sensor on flexible acetate sheet. Sens. Actuators B
Chem. 190, 342–347 (2014)
127. DuVall, J.A., et al.: Optical imaging of paramagnetic bead-DNA aggregation inhibition allows
for low copy number detection of infectious pathogens. PLoS ONE 10(6), e0129830 (2015)
128. Yoon, J., Lee, K., Park, Y.: A simple and rapid method for detecting living microorganisms
in food using laser speckle decorrelation. [Link] (2016)
129. Didar, T.F., et al.: Improved treatment of systemic blood infections using antibiotics with
extracorporeal opsonin hemoadsorption. Biomaterials 67, 382–392 (2015)
130. Yousefi, H., Ali, M.M., Su, H.-M., Filipe, C.D., Didar, T.F.: Sentinel wraps: real-time moni-
toring of food contamination by printing DNAzyme probes on food packaging. ACS Nano
12(4), 3287–3294 (2018)
131. Rooney, M.: Overview of active food packaging. In: Active Food Packaging, pp. 1–37.
Springer (1995)
132. Mahalik, N.P.: Processing and packaging automation systems: a review. Sens. Instrum. Food
Qual. Saf. 3, 12–25 (2009)
133. Robertson, G.L.: Food Packaging: Principles and Practice. CRC Press (2005)
134. Andaleeb, S.S., Hasan, K.: Strategic Marketing Management in Asia: Case Studies and
Lessons Across Industries. Emerald Group Publishing Limited (2016)
135. Han, J.H., Ho, C.H., Rodrigues, E.T.: Intelligent packaging. Innov. Food Packag. 138–155
(2005)
136. Butler, P.: Smart packaging–intelligent packaging for food, beverages, pharmaceuticals and
household products. Mater. World 9(3), 11–13 (2001)
137. Yezza, I.: Printed intelligence in packaging: current and potential applications of nanotech-
nology. In: Proc Symp Nanomaterials for Flexible Packaging, Columbus, Code, vol. 80863
(2009)
138. Rani, D.N., Abraham, T.E.: Kinetic study of a purified anionic peroxidase isolated from Eupa-
torium odoratum and its novel application as time temperature indicator for food materials.
J. Food Eng. 77(3), 594–600 (2006)
139. Yan, S., Huawei, C., Limin, Z., Fazheng, R., Luda, Z., Hengtao, Z.: Development and char-
acterization of a new amylase type time–temperature indicator. Food Control 19(3), 315–319
(2008)
140. Galagan, Y., Su, W.-F.: Fadable ink for time–temperature control of food freshness: novel
new time–temperature indicator. Food Res. Int. 41(6), 653–657 (2008)
141. Vaikousi, H., Biliaderis, C.G., Koutsoumanis, K.P.: Applicability of a microbial time temper-
ature indicator (TTI) for monitoring spoilage of modified atmosphere packed minced meat.
Int. J. Food Microbiol. 133(3), 272–278 (2009)
142. Kuswandi, B., Wicaksono, Y., Jayus, Abdullah, A., Heng, L.Y., Ahmad, M.: Smart packaging:
sensors for monitoring of food quality and safety. Sens. Instrum. Food Qual. Saf. 5, 137–146
(2011)
11 Smart Sensors for Quality Monitoring in Green Packaging Solutions 389

143. Toki, G.F.I., et al.: Single minute exchange die (SMED): a sustainable and well-timed approach
for Bangladeshi garments industry. Clean. Eng. Technol. 12, 100592 (2023). [Link]
10.1016/[Link].2022.100592
144. Islam, M.R., Mia, R., Habib, M.A.B., Lotif, M.A.: A comparative analysis for the cleaner
production of vortex spun yarn based on the nozzle position. Heliyon 8(10), e10963 (2022).
[Link]
145. Taoukis, P., Labuza, T.: Time-temperature indicators (TTIs). Nov. Food Packag. Tech. 103–
126 (2003)
146. Wallach, D., Novikov, A.: Methods and devices for detecting spoilage in food products. PCT
International Patent Application WO 98y20337. Biodetect Corporation (1998)
147. Pacquit, A., et al.: Development of a smart packaging for the monitoring of fish spoilage.
Food Chem. 102(2), 466–470 (2007)
148. Horan, T.J. (ed.): Method for determining bacteria contamination in food package. Google
Patents (1998)
149. Cameron, A.: T. Talasila in modified-atmosphere packaging of fresh fruits and vegetables. In:
IFT Annual Meeting, Book of Abstracts, p. 254 (1995)
150. Shen, Q., Kong, F., Wang, Q.: Effect of modified atmosphere packaging on the browning and
lignification of bamboo shoots. J. Food Eng. 77(2), 348–354 (2006)
151. Smolander, M., Hurme, E., Ahvenainen, R.: Leak indicators for modified-atmosphere
packages. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 8(4), 101–106 (1997)
152. Abe, Y.: Active packaging with oxygen absorbers. In: VTT Symposium, vol. 142, pp. 209–209.
Valtion Teknillinen Tutkimuskeskus (1994)
153. Hurme, E., Ahvenainen, R.: Active and smart packaging of ready-made foods. In: Proceedings
of International Symposium Minimal Process, pp. 1–7. Ready Made Foods (1996)
154. Kuswandi, B.: Real-time quality assessment of fruits and vegetables: sensing approaches.
In: Sensor-Based Quality Assessment Systems for Fruits and Vegetables, pp. 1–30. Apple
Academic Press, (2020)
155. Nakamura, H., Nakazawa, N., Kawamura, Y.: Food oxidation indicating material-comprises
oxygen absorbtion agent containing indicator composed of methylene blue. Reducing Agent
Resin Bind. JP 62–183834 (1987)
156. Mattila-Sandholm, T., Ahvenainen, R., Hurme, E., Järvi-Kääriänen, T.: Oxygen sensitive
colour indicator for detecting leaks in gas-protected food packages. Eur. Pat. EP 666977
(1998)
157. Davies, E., Garner, C. (ed.): Oxygen indicating composition. UK Patent Application GB 2
298273. The Victoria University of Manchester Manchester (1996)
158. Mattila, T., Tawast, J., Ahvenainen, R.: New possibilities for quality control of aseptic
packages: microbiological spoilage and seal defect detection using head-space indicators
(1990)
159. DeCicco, B.T., Keeven, J.K. (ed.): Detection system for microbial contamination in health-
care products. Google Patents (1995)
160. Kress-Rogers, E.: The marker concept: frying oil monitor and meat freshness sensor. In:
Kress-Rogers, E. (ed.) Butterworth-Heinemann, vol. 523, p. 1993. Stoneham, Mass (1993)
161. Rubio Retama, J., Mecerreyes, D., Lopez-Ruiz, B., Lopez-Cabarcos, E.: Synthesis and char-
acterization of semiconducting polypyrrole/polyacrylamide microparticles with GOx for
biosensor applications. Colloids Surf. A Physicochemical Eng. Asp. 270, 239–244 (2005)
162. Ahuja, T., Mir, I.A., Kumar, D.: Biomolecular immobilization on conducting polymers for
biosensing applications. Biomaterials 28(5), 791–805 (2007)
163. Arshak, K., Adley, C., Moore, E., Cunniffe, C., Campion, M., Harris, J.: Characterisation of
polymer nanocomposite sensors for quantification of bacterial cultures. Sens. Actuators B
Chem. 126(1), 226–231 (2007)
164. Subramanian, V., et al.: Progress toward development of all-printed RFID tags: materials,
processes, and devices. Proc. IEEE 93(7), 1330–1338 (2005)
165. Tentzeris, M.: Novel paper-based inkjet-printed antennas and wireless sensor modules.
In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Microwaves, Communications, Antennas and
Electronic Systems, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2008)
390 G. F. I. Toki et al.

166. Loh, K.J., Lynch, J.P., Kotov, N.A.: Passive wireless sensing using SWNT-based multifunc-
tional thin film patches. Int. J. Appl. Electromag. Mech. 28(1–2), 87–94 (2008)
167. Demoustier, S., Minoux, E., Le Baillif, M., Charles, M., Ziaei, A.: Review of two microwave
applications of carbon nanotubes: nano-antennas and nano-switches. C R Phys. 9(1), 53–66
(2008)
168. Jedermann, R., Behrens, C., Westphal, D., Lang, W.: Applying autonomous sensor systems in
logistics—combining sensor networks, RFIDs and software agents. Sens. Actuators A 132(1),
370–375 (2006)
169. Potyrailo, R.A., Mouquin, H., Morris, W.G.: Position-independent chemical quantitation with
passive 13.56-MHz radio frequency identification (RFID) sensors. Talanta 75(3), 624–628
(2008)
170. Mahajan, P.V., Caleb, O.J., Singh, Z., Watkins, C.B., Geyer, M.: Postharvest treatments of
fresh produce. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 372(2017), 20130309 (2014).
[Link]
171. Boerman, J.K., Bauersfeld, M.L., Schmitt, K., Wöllenstein, J.: Detection of gaseous ethanol
by the use of ambient temperature platinum catalyst. Procedia Eng. 168, 201–205 (2016).
[Link]
172. Hu, L.-Y., et al.: Hydrogen sulfide prolongs postharvest shelf life of strawberry and plays an
antioxidative role in fruits. J. Agric. Food Chem. 60(35), 8684–8693 (2012). [Link]
10.1021/jf300728h
173. Alam, A.U., Rathi, P., Beshai, H., Sarabha, G.K., Deen, M.J.: Fruit quality monitoring with
smart packaging. Sensors 21(4). [Link]