Recent Advances and Unaddressed Challenges in Biomimetic Olfactory- and Taste-Based Biosensors: Moving Towards Integrated, AI-Powered, and Market-Ready Sensing Systems
Highlights
- Hybrid biomimetic olfactory–taste systems, strengthened by advanced recognition elements and nanomaterials, outperform single-modality sensors in sensitivity, selectivity, and robustness.
- AI-driven analytics (e.g., drift compensation, data fusion, and forecasting) make these platforms more reliable and predictive on real-world samples.
- Integrated “e-panel” sensors (olfaction + taste) enable on-site, real-time decisions for food safety, healthcare, and environmental monitoring.
- The convergence of biomimetic interfaces, modern materials, and AI is accelerating translation toward practical, market-ready applications.
- Recent progress in olfactory and taste biosensors has been driven by advances in nanomaterials, recognition elements, and AI-based data processing.
- Hybrid systems that combine olfactory and taste sensing outperform single-modality sensors, offering higher sensitivity, selectivity, and robustness.
- Integrating olfactory and taste functions into one sensor platform opens new opportunities for food safety, healthcare, and environmental monitoring.
- These hybrid, AI-enabled biosensors are moving closer to practical, market-ready applications.
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Methodology for Literature Collection and Analysis
3. Principles of Olfactory and Taste Biosensors
3.1. Biological Basis
3.2. Signal Transduction Mechanisms
3.3. Performance Metrics
4. Advances in Materials & Device Engineering
4.1. Recognition Elements & Biorecognition Strategies
4.2. Signal Amplification & Sensitivity Enhancement
4.3. Transducer Technologies & Device Integration
4.4. Comparative Analysis of Olfactory vs. Taste Biosensor Engineering
4.5. Challenges & Emerging Solutions
5. AI & Data-Driven Enhancements
5.1. Machine Learning for Detection
5.2. Data Fusion Across Sensor Arrays
5.3. Real-Time Analytics & IoT
5.4. Current Limitations
6. Hybrid & Multiplexed Systems
6.1. Cross-Modal Olfactory–Taste Platforms
6.2. Multifunctional Detection Architectures
6.3. Application Scenarios in Food, Environment, and Healthcare
7. Pathways to Market Readiness
7.1. Current Market Landscape
7.2. Technical Challenges
7.3. Regulatory and Manufacturing Barriers
7.4. Pathways to Market
8. Future Directions
8.1. Multidisciplinary Integration
8.2. Adaptive and Self-Learning Biosensors
8.3. Hybrid and Cross-Modal Architectures
8.4. Sustainability, Portability, and Manufacturability
8.5. Open Datasets and Collaborative AI
8.6. Regulatory Alignment and Market Translation
9. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| ANN | Artificial Neural Networks |
| AI | Artificial Intelligence |
| CNN | Convolutional Neural Networks |
| CNT | Carbon Nanotube |
| DFM | Design for Manufacturability |
| DT | Decision Trees |
| e-Nose | Electronic Nose |
| e-Tongue | Electronic Tongue |
| EIS | Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy |
| FETs | Field-Effect Transistors |
| GCE | Glassy Carbon Electrode |
| GPCR | G Protein-Coupled Receptor |
| ISFETs | Ion-Sensitive FETs |
| IoT | Internet of Things |
| KNN | k-Nearest Neighbor |
| LOD | Limit of Detection |
| MEA | Microelectrode Array |
| MEA | Multi-Factor Analysis |
| MIPs | Molecularly Imprinted Polymers |
| ML | Machine Learning |
| MOFs | Metal–Organic Frameworks |
| OECTs | Organic Electrochemical Transistors |
| OFET | Organic Field-Effect Transistor |
| OSNs | Olfactory Sensory Neurons |
| OR | Odorant Receptor |
| OTSM | Olfactory–Taste Synesthesia Model |
| PCA | Principal Component Analysis |
| QCM | Quartz Crystal Microbalance |
| RNN | Recurrent Neural Networks |
| SPR | Surface Plasmon Resonance |
| SVM | Support Vector Machines |
| SVR | Support Vector Regression |
| TMDCs | Transition Metal Dichalcogenides |
| VOC | Volatile Organic Compound |
References
- Chen, Y.; Du, L.; Tian, Y.; Zhu, P.; Liu, S.; Liang, D.; Liu, Y.; Wang, M.; Chen, W.; Wu, C. Progress in the Development of Detection Strategies Based on Olfactory and Gustatory Biomimetic Biosensors. Biosensors 2022, 12, 858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qin, C.; Wang, Y.; Hu, J.; Wang, T.; Liu, D.; Dong, J.; Lu, Y. Artificial Olfactory Biohybrid System: An Evolving Sense of Smell. Adv. Sci. 2022, 10, 2204726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, C.; Lee, K.K.; Kang, M.S.; Shin, D.-M.; Oh, J.-W.; Lee, C.-S.; Han, D.-W. Artificial olfactory sensor technology that mimics the olfactory mechanism: A comprehensive review. Biomater. Res. 2022, 26, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Wu, Q.; Wu, Z.; Zhuang, Y.; Sun, L.; Fan, X.; Zhao, T.; Yi, L.; Gu, Y. Biomimetic functional material-based sensors for food safety analysis: A review. Food Chem. 2023, 405, 134974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, J.; Fan, M.; Zhang, X.; Liang, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Lin, C.-T.; Zhang, D. A novel biomimetic electrochemical taste-biosensor based on conformational changes of the taste receptor. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2024, 249, 116001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramajayam, K.; Ganesan, S.; Ramesh, P.; Beena, M.; Kokulnathan, T.; Palaniappan, A. Molecularly Imprinted Polymer-Based Biomimetic Systems for Sensing Environmental Contaminants, Biomarkers, and Bioimaging Applications. Biomimetics 2023, 8, 245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sahoo, J.; Sharma, R.; Pachauri, V.; Gandhi, S. Biomimetic/Bioderived Nanoengineered Interfaces for Biosensor Applications: A Review. ACS Appl. Nano Mater. 2024, 7, 19854–19875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xing, Z.; Zogona, D.; Wu, T.; Pan, S.; Xu, X. Applications, challenges and prospects of bionic nose in rapid perception of volatile organic compounds of food. Food Chem. 2023, 415, 135650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelosi, P.; Zhu, J.; Knoll, W. From Gas Sensors to Biomimetic Artificial Noses. Chemosensors 2018, 6, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toko, K. Biomimetic Sensor Technology, 1st ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Chen, R.; Zhang, H.; Chen, J.; Liang, B. Dynamic forecasting of beef freshness using multi-step time series analysis of electronic nose signals. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2025, 290, 117977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shtepliuk, I.; Domènech-Gil, G.; Almqvist, V.; Kautto, A.H.; Vågsholm, I.; Boqvist, S.; Eriksson, J.; Puglisi, D. Electronic nose and machine learning for modern meat inspection. J. Big Data 2025, 12, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buratti, S.; Grassi, S.; Ubaldi, P.G.; Pianezzola, A.; Benedetti, S. E-nose based control charts for fish freshness evaluation. Food Res. Int. 2025, 209, 116313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sánchez, R.; Díaz, F.; Melo, L. Portable MOS Electronic Nose Screening of Virgin Olive Oils with HS-SPME-GC–MS Corroboration: Classification and Estimation of Sunflower-Oil Adulteration. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaushal, S.; Rana, P.; Chung, C.-C.; Chen, H.-H. Geographical Origin Classification of Oolong Tea Using an Electronic Nose: Application of Machine Learning and Gray Relational Analysis. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shi, X.; Li, Y.; Huang, D.; Chen, S.; Zhu, S. Characterization and discrimination of volatile compounds in roasted Arabica coffee beans from different origins by combining GC-TOFMS, GC-IMS, and GC-E-Nose. Food Chem. 2025, 481, 144079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez, R.; Lozano, J.; Arroyo, P.; Meléndez, F. Detection of 2,4,6-Trichloroanisole in Sparkling Wines Using a Portable E-Nose and Chemometric Tools. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Darvishi, P.; Mirzaee-Ghaleh, E.; Ramedani, Z.; Karami, H.; Wilson, A.D. A novel approach for identifying melamine adulteration in powdered milk with E-nose and AI. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2025, 202, 115521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gillay, B.; Gillay, Z.; Kovacs, Z.; Eles, V.; Toth, T.; Yakubu, H.G.; Aldib, I.; Bazar, G. Coffees Brewed from Standard Capsules Help to Compare Different Aroma Fingerprinting Technologies—A Comparison of an Electronic Tongue and Electronic Noses. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chun, S.Y.; Song, Y.G.; Kim, J.E.; Kwon, J.U.; Soh, K.; Kwon, J.Y.; Kang, C.; Yoon, J.H. An Artificial Olfactory System Based on a Chemi-Memristive Device. Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2302219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, Y.; Zhao, M.; Ma, Y.; Liu, S.; Liu, M.; Shen, B.; Li, R.; Ding, H.; Cheng, H.; Sheng, X.; et al. A Flexible and Biomimetic Olfactory Synapse with Gasotransmitter-Mediated Plasticity. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2023, 33, 2214139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Shi, S.; Jiang, J.; Lin, D.; Song, J.; Wang, Z.; Huang, W. Bionic Olfactory Neuron with In-Sensor Reservoir Computing for Intelligent Gas Recognition. Adv. Mater. 2025, 37, 2419159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Zhu, L.; Li, T.; Li, X.; Huang, K.; Xu, W. Multiple functionalities of functional nucleic acids for developing high-performance lateral flow assays. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2022, 148, 116529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thapa, R.; Poudel, S.; Krukiewicz, K.; Kunwar, A. A topical review on AI-interlinked biodomain sensors for multi-purpose applications. Measurement 2024, 227, 114123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Z.; Wang, L.; Lee, C. Recent Advances in Artificial Intelligence Sensors. Adv. Sens. Res. 2023, 2, 2200072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sumitha, M.S.; Xavier, T.S. Recent advances in electrochemical biosensors—A brief review. Hybrid Adv. 2023, 2, 100023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deng, H.; Nakamoto, T. Biosensors for Odor Detection: A Review. Biosensors 2023, 13, 1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, C.; Luo, Y.; Xu, J.; Debliquy, M. Room temperature conductive type metal oxide semiconductor gas sensors for NO2 detection. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2019, 289, 118–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ye, Z.; Liu, Y.; Li, Q. Recent Progress in Smart Electronic Nose Technologies Enabled with Machine Learning Methods. Sensors 2021, 21, 7620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dung, T.; Oh, Y.; Choi, S.-J.; Kim, I.-D.; Oh, M.-K.; Kim, M. Applications and Advances in Bioelectronic Noses for Odour Sensing. Sensors 2018, 18, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Poeta, E.; Núñez-Carmona, E.; Sberveglieri, V. A Review: Applications of MOX Sensors from Air Quality Monitoring to Biomedical Diagnosis and Agro-Food Quality Control. J. Sens. Actuator Netw. 2025, 14, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saruhan, B.; Lontio Fomekong, R.; Nahirniak, S. Review: Influences of Semiconductor Metal Oxide Properties on Gas Sensing Characteristics. Front. Sensors 2021, 2, 657931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, Y.; Liu, Q. Insect olfactory system inspired biosensors for odorant detection. Sens. Diagn. 2022, 1, 1126–1142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, Z.; Zhao, J.; Liu, L.; Liu, F.; Wang, Z.; Wang, F.; Liu, J.; Mou, Y.; Wu, L.; Wu, X. Humidity-independent gas sensors in the detection of hydrogen sulfide based on Nd2O3-loaded In2O3 porous nanorods. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2023, 403, 135237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mulla, M.Y.; Tuccori, E.; Magliulo, M.; Lattanzi, G.; Palazzo, G.; Persaud, K.; Torsi, L. Capacitance-modulated transistor detects odorant binding protein chiral interactions. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Samotaev, N.; Oblov, K.; Gorshkova, A.; Fritsch, M.; Mosch, S.; Vinnichenko, M.; Trofimenko, N.; Kusnezoff, M.; Fuchs, F.-M.; Wissmeier, L. Ceramic microhotplates for low power metal oxide gas sensors. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 30, 448–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pelosi, P.; Zhu, J.; Knoll, W. Odorant-Binding Proteins as Sensing Elements for Odour Monitoring. Sensors 2018, 18, 3248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhall, S.; Mehta, B.R.; Tyagi, A.K.; Sood, K. A review on environmental gas sensors: Materials and technologies. Sens. Int. 2021, 2, 100116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fritzsch, B.; Elliott, K.L. Evolution of Neurosensory Cells and Systems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burton, S.D.; Brown, A.; Eiting, T.P.; Youngstrom, I.A.; Rust, T.C.; Schmuker, M.; Wachowiak, M. Mapping odorant sensitivities reveals a sparse but structured represen tation of olfactory chemical space by sensory input to the mouse olfac tory bulb. eLife 2022, 11, e80470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dorrego-Rivas, A.; Grubb, M.S. Developing and maintaining a nose-to-brain map of odorant identity. Open Biol. 2022, 12, 220053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quesada, Z.M.; Portillo, W.; Paredes, R.G. Behavioral evidence of the functional interaction between the main and accessory olfactory system suggests a large olfactory system with a high plastic capability. Front. Neuroanat. 2023, 17, 1211644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behrens, M.; Lang, T. Extra-Oral Taste Receptors—Function, Disease, and Perspectives. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 881177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shaji, C.S.; Saraswathy, R. Taste receptors influencing effective modalities in human health—A cutting edge update on TAS1R and TAS2R receptor polymorphisms in taste perception and disease risk. Nutr. Heal. 2023, 02601060231186865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kouakou, Y.I.; Lee, R.J. Interkingdom Detection of Bacterial Quorum-Sensing Molecules by Mammalian Taste Receptors. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 1295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, X.; Lu, D.; Liu, Y.; Wang, W.; Ren, R.; Li, M.; Liu, D.; Liu, Y.; Liu, Y.; Pang, G. Electrochemical Signal Amplification Strategies and Their Use in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation. Biosensors 2022, 12, 566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hao, R.; Liu, L.; Yuan, J.; Wu, L.; Lei, S. Recent Advances in Field Effect Transistor Biosensors: Designing Strategies and Applications for Sensitive Assay. Biosensors 2023, 13, 426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, S.; Zhu, P.; Tian, Y.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Wang, M.; Chen, W.; Du, L.; Wu, C. A Taste Bud Organoid-Based Microelectrode Array Biosensor for Taste Sensing. Chemosensors 2022, 10, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karawdeniya, B.I.; Damry, A.M.; Murugappan, K.; Manjunath, S.; Bandara, Y.M.N.D.Y.; Jackson, C.J.; Tricoli, A.; Neshev, D. Surface Functionalization and Texturing of Optical Metasurfaces for Sensing Applications. Chem. Rev. 2022, 122, 14990–15030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polat, E.O.; Cetin, M.M.; Tabak, A.F.; Güven, E.B.; Uysal, B.Ö.; Arsan, T.; Kabbani, A.; Hamed, H.; Gül, S.B. Transducer Technologies for Biosensors and Their Wearable Applications. Biosensors 2022, 12, 385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jalalvand, A.R.; Karami, M.M. Roles of nanotechnology in electrochemical sensors for medical diagnostic purposes: A review. Sens. Bio-Sens. Res. 2025, 47, 100733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qing, R.; Xue, M.; Zhao, J.; Wu, L.; Breitwieser, A.; Smorodina, E.; Schubert, T.; Azzellino, G.; Jin, D.; Kong, J.; et al. Scalable biomimetic sensing system with membrane receptor dual-monolayer probe and graphene transistor arrays. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9, eadf1402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ullah, S.F.; Moreira, G.; Datta, S.P.A.; McLamore, E.; Vanegas, D. An Experimental Framework for Developing Point-of-Need Biosensors: Connecting Bio-Layer Interferometry and Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy. Biosensors 2022, 12, 938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anvarifard, M.K.; Ramezani, Z. A novel TFET based nanogap high-sensitive biosensor by boosted reliability—New metric for sensitivity definition. Phys. E Low-Dimens. Syst. Nanostruct. 2024, 162, 115998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, O.S.; Bedwell, T.S.; Esen, C.; Garcia-Cruz, A.; Piletsky, S.A. Molecularly Imprinted Polymers in Electrochemical and Optical Sensors. Trends Biotechnol. 2019, 37, 294–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tchekwagep, P.M.S.; Crapnell, R.D.; Banks, C.E.; Betlem, K.; Rinner, U.; Canfarotta, F.; Lowdon, J.W.; Eersels, K.; van Grinsven, B.; Peeters, M.; et al. A Critical Review on the Use of Molecular Imprinting for Trace Heavy Metal and Micropollutant Detection. Chemosensors 2022, 10, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomita, S. Chemical tongues: Biomimetic recognition using arrays of synthetic polymers. Polym. J. 2022, 54, 851–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grieshaber, D.; MacKenzie, R.; Vörös, J.; Reimhult, E. Electrochemical Biosensors—Sensor Principles and Architectures. Sensors 2008, 8, 1400–1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jeong, J.-Y.; Cha, Y.K.; Ahn, S.R.; Shin, J.; Choi, Y.; Park, T.H.; Hong, S. Ultrasensitive Bioelectronic Tongue Based on the Venus Flytrap Domain of a Human Sweet Taste Receptor. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2022, 14, 2478–2487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, M.; Jung, J.W.; Kim, D.; Ahn, Y.-J.; Hong, S.; Kwon, H.W. Discrimination of Umami Tastants Using Floating Electrode-Based Bioelectronic Tongue Mimicking Insect Taste Systems. ACS Nano 2015, 9, 11728–11736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, H.J.; An, J.M.; Park, J.; Moon, S.J.; Hong, S. “Chemical-pain sensor” based on nanovesicle–carbon nanotube hybrid structures. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 49, 86–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, K.H.; Seo, S.E.; Lee, S.H.; Kwon, O.S. Bioelectronics for bitterness-based phytocompound detection using human bitter taste receptor nanodiscs. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2024, 264, 116679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Y.; Lu, D.; Liu, H.; Liu, S.; Jiang, S.; Pang, G.-C.; Liu, Y. Preliminary research on the receptor–ligand recognition mechanism of umami by an hT1R1 biosensor. Food Funct. 2019, 10, 1280–1287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Wang, W.; Liu, J.; Li, H.; Zhang, N.; Yang, F.; Dong, H.; Sun, X.; Chen, G.; Fan, Y.; et al. Human-like performance umami electrochemical biosensor by utilizing co-electrodeposition of ligand binding domain T1R1-VFT and Prussian blue. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 193, 113627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, S.; Song, P.; Bu, F.; Pang, G.; Zhou, A.; Zhang, Y.; Xie, J. The investigation of detection and sensing mechanism of spicy substance based on human TRPV1 channel protein-cell membrane biosensor. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 172, 112779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Z.; Zhang, Q.; Shan, J.; Lu, Y.; Liu, Q. Detection of Bitter Taste Molecules Based on Odorant-Binding Protein-Modified Screen-Printed Electrodes. ACS Omega 2020, 5, 27536–27545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Son, M.; Kim, D.; Ko, H.J.; Hong, S.; Park, T.H. A portable and multiplexed bioelectronic sensor using human olfactory and taste receptors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2017, 87, 901–907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kwon, O.S.; Song, H.S.; Park, S.J.; Lee, S.H.; An, J.H.; Park, J.W.; Yang, H.; Yoon, H.; Bae, J.; Park, T.H.; et al. An Ultrasensitive, Selective, Multiplexed Superbioelectronic Nose That Mimics the Human Sense of Smell. Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 6559–6567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shin, N.; Lee, S.H.; Ba, V.A.P.; Park, T.H.; Hong, S. Micelle-stabilized Olfactory Receptors for a Bioelectronic Nose Detecting Butter Flavors in Real Fermented Alcoholic Beverages. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 9064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lee, M.; Yang, H.; Kim, D.; Yang, M.; Park, T.H.; Hong, S. Human-like smelling of a rose scent using an olfactory receptor nanodisc-based bioelectronic nose. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 13945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, K.H.; Song, H.S.; Kwon, O.S.; Park, T.H. Graphene Field-Effect Transistors: Advanced Bioelectronic Devices for Sensing Applications. In Graphene Field-Effect Transistors: Advanced Bioelectronic Devices for Sensing Applications; Wiley: Weinheim, Germany, 2023; pp. 103–123. [Google Scholar]
- Larisika, M.; Kotlowski, C.; Steininger, C.; Mastrogiacomo, R.; Pelosi, P.; Schütz, S.; Peteu, S.F.; Kleber, C.; Reiner-Rozman, C.; Nowak, C.; et al. Electronic Olfactory Sensor Based on A. mellifera Odorant-Binding Protein 14 on a Reduced Graphene Oxide Field-Effect Transistor. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2015, 54, 13245–13248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Ma, W.; Wei, J.; Lan, K.; Yan, S.; Chen, R.; Qin, G. Ultrasensitive Flexible Olfactory Receptor-Derived Peptide Sensor for Trimethylamine Detection by the Bending Connection Method. ACS Sens. 2022, 7, 3513–3520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tors, L. Organic Bioelectronic Transistors: From Fundamental Investigation of Bio-Interfaces to Highly Performing Biosensors. Mater. Res. Found. 2019, 56, 1–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lan, K.; Liu, S.; Wang, Z.; Wei, J.; Qin, G. High-performance olfactory receptor-derived peptide sensor for trimethylamine detection on the pyramid substrate structure. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2023, 358, 114452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, J.H.; Park, J.; Ahn, J.H.; Jin, H.J.; Hong, S.; Park, T.H. A peptide receptor-based bioelectronic nose for the real-time determination of seafood quality. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 39, 244–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.H.; Lim, J.H.; Park, J.; Hong, S.; Park, T.H. Bioelectronic nose combined with a microfluidic system for the detection of gaseous trimethylamine. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2015, 71, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, Z.; Ma, W.; Wei, J.; Lan, K.; Yan, S.; Chen, R.; Qin, G. High-performance olfactory receptor-derived peptide sensor for trimethylamine detection based on Steglich esterification reaction and native chemical ligation connection. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2022, 195, 113673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khadka, R.; Aydemir, N.; Carraher, C.; Hamiaux, C.; Colbert, D.; Cheema, J.; Malmström, J.; Kralicek, A.; Travas-Sejdic, J. An ultrasensitive electrochemical impedance-based biosensor using insect odorant receptors to detect odorants. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 126, 207–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, Z.; Zine, N.; Lagarde, F.; Daligault, J.; Persuy, M.-A.; Pajot-Augy, E.; Zhang, A.; Jaffrezic-Renault, N. A novel platform based on immobilized histidine tagged olfactory receptors, for the amperometric detection of an odorant molecule characteristic of boar taint. Food Chem. 2015, 184, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Naresh, V.; Lee, N. A Review on Biosensors and Recent Development of Nanostructured Materials-Enabled Biosensors. Sensors 2021, 21, 1109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhou, C.; Zou, H.; Sun, C.; Li, Y. Recent advances in biosensors for antibiotic detection: Selectivity and signal amplification with nanomaterials. Food Chem. 2021, 361, 130109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cajigas, S.; Orozco, J. Nanobioconjugates for Signal Amplification in Electrochemical Biosensing. Molecules 2020, 25, 3542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, Z.; Han, X.; Zhao, C.; Wang, S.; Tang, X. Recent Advance in Biological Responsive Nanomaterials for Biosensing and Molecular Imaging Application. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 1923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuntoji, G.; Kousar, N.; Gaddimath, S.; Sannegowda, L.K. Macromolecule–Nanoparticle-Based Hybrid Materials for Biosensor Applications. Biosensors 2024, 14, 277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, C.; Du, Y.-W.; Huang, L.; Ben-Shoshan Galeczki, Y.; Dagan-Wiener, A.; Naim, M.; Niv, M.Y.; Wang, P. Biomimetic Sensors for the Senses: Towards Better Understanding of Taste and Odor Sensation. Sensors 2017, 17, 2881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Calvini, R.; Pigani, L. Toward the Development of Combined Artificial Sensing Systems for Food Quality Evaluation: A Review on the Application of Data Fusion of Electronic Noses, Electronic Tongues and Electronic Eyes. Sensors 2022, 22, 577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kesler, V.; Murmann, B.; Soh, H.T. Going beyond the Debye Length: Overcoming Charge Screening Limitations in Next-Generation Bioelectronic Sensors. ACS Nano 2020, 14, 16194–16201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Di Natale, C.; Paolesse, R.; Macagnano, A.; Mantini, A.; D’Amico, A.; Legin, A.; Lvova, L.; Rudnitskaya, A.; Vlasov, Y. Electronic nose and electronic tongue integration for improved classification of clinical and food samples. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2000, 64, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prabowo, B.; Purwidyantri, A.; Liu, K.-C. Surface Plasmon Resonance Optical Sensor: A Review on Light Source Technology. Biosensors 2018, 8, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johannsmann, D.; Langhoff, A.; Leppin, C. Studying Soft Interfaces with Shear Waves: Principles and Applications of the Quartz Crystal Microbalance (QCM). Sensors 2021, 21, 3490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Y.P.; Ding, Z.; Yu, Y.; He, P.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, Y.; Feng, X. Recent advances in investigating odor-taste interactions: Psychophysics, neuroscience, and microfluidic techniques. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2023, 138, 500–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rudnitskaya, A. Calibration Update and Drift Correction for Electronic Noses and Tongues. Front. Chem. 2018, 6, 433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Xia, C.; Wang, J.; Chen, S.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, S.; Geng, Z.; Tang, K.; Erdem, A.; Zhu, B. Ready-to-Use OECT Biosensor toward Rapid and Real-Time Protein Detection in Complex Biological Environments. ACS Sens. 2025, 10, 3369–3380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tian, C.; Cho, Y.; Song, Y.; Park, S.; Kim, I.; Cho, S.-Y. Integration of AI with artificial sensory systems for multidimensional intelligent augmentation. Int. J. Extrem. Manuf. 2025, 7, 042002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, Y.; Li, C.; Jiang, Y.; Guo, M.; Yang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Yu, H. Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopic Detection of E.coli with Machine Learning. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2020, 167, 047508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kokabi, M.; Tahir, M.N.; Singh, D.; Javanmard, M. Advancing Healthcare: Synergizing Biosensors and Machine Learning for Early Cancer Diagnosis. Biosensors 2023, 13, 884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, J.M.; Ramos, P. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Time Series Transformers for Demand Forecasting in Retail. Mathematics 2024, 12, 2728. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arano-Martinez, J.A.; Martínez-González, C.L.; Salazar, M.I.; Torres-Torres, C. A Framework for Biosensors Assisted by Multiphoton Effects and Machine Learning. Biosensors 2022, 12, 710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, S.; Guo, J.; Liu, S.; Yang, B.; Liu, M.; Yin, L.; Zheng, W. An Improved Algorithm of Drift Compensation for Olfactory Sensors. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 9529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhai, Z.; Liu, Y.; Li, C.; Wang, D.; Wu, H. Electronic Noses: From Gas-Sensitive Components and Practical Applications to Data Processing. Sensors 2024, 24, 4806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pan, S.J.; Tsang, I.W.; Kwok, J.T.; Yang, Q. Domain Adaptation via Transfer Component Analysis. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 2011, 22, 199–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ma, Z.; Luo, G.; Qin, K.; Wang, N.; Niu, W. Online Sensor Drift Compensation for E-Nose Systems Using Domain Adaptation and Extreme Learning Machine. Sensors 2018, 18, 742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sun, J.; Dong, M.; Lu, F.; Wang, Z.; Zhu, J.; Wang, Y.; Zheng, L.; Zhao, F. Transformer-driven multi-scale contextual alignment for robust E-nose drift compensation. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2025, 327, 114136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, J.; Zheng, H.; Diao, W.; Sun, Z.; Qi, Z.; Wang, X. Prototype-Optimized unsupervised domain adaptation via dynamic Transformer encoder for sensor drift compensation in electronic nose systems. Expert Syst. Appl. 2024, 260, 125444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chung, J.; Zhang, J.; Saimon, A.I.; Liu, Y.; Johnson, B.N.; Kong, Z. Imbalanced spectral data analysis using data augmentation based on the generative adversarial network. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 13230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Shi, Y.; Niu, H.; Zhao, K. Generative Adversarial Networks in Imbalanced Gas Samples. Electronics 2025, 14, 1346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Flynn, C.D.; Chang, D. Artificial Intelligence in Point-of-Care Biosensing: Challenges and Opportunities. Diagnostics 2024, 14, 1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gómez, J.K.C.; Vásquez, C.A.C.; Acevedo, C.M.D.; Llecha, J.B. Assessing Data Fusion in Sensory Devices for Enhanced Prostate Cancer Detection Accuracy. Chemosensors 2024, 12, 228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kodogiannis, V.S.; Alshejari, A. Data Fusion of Electronic Nose and Multispectral Imaging for Meat Spoilage Detection Using Machine Learning Techniques. Sensors 2025, 25, 3198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ficili, I.; Giacobbe, M.; Tricomi, G.; Puliafito, A. From sensors to data intelligence: Leveraging IoT, cloud, and edge com-puting with AI. Sensors 2025, 25, 1763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uddin, R.; Koo, I. Real-Time Remote Patient Monitoring: A Review of Biosensors Integrated with Multi-Hop IoT Systems via Cloud Connectivity. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 1876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nayak, S.; Patgiri, R.; Waikhom, L.; Ahmed, A. A review on edge analytics: Issues, challenges, opportunities, promises, future directions, and applications. Digit. Commun. Netw. 2024, 10, 783–804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shumba, A.-T.; Montanaro, T.; Sergi, I.; Fachechi, L.; De Vittorio, M.; Patrono, L. Leveraging IoT-Aware Technologies and AI Techniques for Real-Time Critical Healthcare Applications. Sensors 2022, 22, 7675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sobhan, A.; Hossain, A.; Wei, L.; Muthukumarappan, K.; Ahmed, M. IoT-Enabled Biosensors in Food Packaging: A Breakthrough in Food Safety for Monitoring Risks in Real Time. Foods 2025, 14, 1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouderhem, R. Ethical and Regulatory Challenges for AI Biosensors in Healthcare. Proceedings 2024, 104, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talreja, R.K.; Sable, H.; Kadian, S.; Singh, M.; Kumar, M.; Kishore, J.; Chaudhary, V.; Khosla, A. Review—Challenges in Lab-to-Clinic Translation of 5th/6th Generation Intelligent Nanomaterial-enabled Biosensors. ECS Sens. Plus 2024, 3, 041602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, W.; Shi, Y.; Ying, Y.; Men, H. Olfactory-taste synesthesia model: An integrated method for flavor responses of electronic nose and electronic tongue. Sens. Actuators A Phys. 2022, 350, 114134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakib, N.U.; Sadaf, M.U.K.; Pannone, A.; Ghosh, S.; Zheng, Y.; Ravichandran, H.; Das, S. A Crayfish-Inspired Sensor Fusion Platform for Super Additive Integration of Visual, Chemical, and Tactile Information. Nano Lett. 2024, 24, 6948–6956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weerakkody, J.S.; El Kazzy, M.; Jacquier, E.; Elchinger, P.-H.; Mathey, R.; Ling, W.L.; Herrier, C.; Livache, T.; Buhot, A.; Hou, Y. Surfactant-like Peptide Self-Assembled into Hybrid Nanostructures for Electronic Nose Applications. ACS Nano 2022, 16, 4444–4457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ullah, N.; Bruce-Tagoe, T.A.; Asamoah, G.A.; Danquah, M.K. Multimodal Biosensing of Foodborne Pathogens. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 5959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mor, S.; Gunay, B.; Zanotti, M.; Galvani, M.; Pagliara, S.; Sangaletti, L. Current Opportunities and Trends in the Gas Sensor Market: A Focus on e-Noses and Their Applications in Food Industry. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alfieri, G.; Modesti, M.; Riggi, R.; Bellincontro, A. Recent Advances and Future Perspectives in the E-Nose Technologies Addressed to the Wine Industry. Sensors 2024, 24, 2293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wasilewski, T.; Neubauer, D.; Kamysz, W.; Gębicki, J. Recent progress in the development of peptide-based gas biosensors for environmental monitoring. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2022, 5, 100197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, H.W.; Moon, D.; Won, Y.; Cha, Y.K.; Yoo, J.; Park, T.H.; Oh, J.H. A pattern recognition artificial olfactory system based on human olfactory receptors and organic synaptic devices. Sci. Adv. 2024, 10, eadl2882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Durán Acevedo, C.M.; Carrillo Gómez, J.K.; Cuastumal Vasquez, C.A.; Ramos, J. Prostate Cancer Detection in Colombian Patients through E-Senses Devices in Exhaled Breath and Urine Samples. Chemosensors 2024, 12, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Y.; Liu, L.; Qiao, Y.; Yao, T.; Zhao, X.; Yan, Y. Confinement of ions within graphene oxide membranes enables neuromorphic artificial gustation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2025, 122, e2413060122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shtepliuk, I.; Montelius, K.; Eriksson, J.; Puglisi, D. Adaptive Machine Learning for Electronic Nose-Based Forensic VOC Classification. Adv. Sci. 2025, 12, e04657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, K.; Zeng, M.; Wang, T.; Wu, Y.; Ni, W.; Chen, L.; Yang, J.; Hu, N.; Zhang, B.; Xuan, F.; et al. Gas Sensor Drift Compensation Using Semi-Supervised Ensemble Classifiers with Multi-Level Features and Center Loss. ACS Sens. 2025, 10, 2906–2918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sun, F.; Sun, R.; Yan, J. Cross-Domain Active Learning for Electronic Nose Drift Compensation. Micromachines 2022, 13, 1260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wang, S.; Chen, X.; Zhao, C.; Kong, Y.; Lin, B.; Wu, Y.; Bi, Z.; Xuan, Z.; Li, T.; Li, Y.; et al. An organic electrochemical transistor for multi-modal sensing, memory and processing. Nat. Electron. 2023, 6, 281–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taverna, G.; Grizzi, F.; Tidu, L.; Bax, C.; Zanoni, M.; Vota, P.; Lotesoriere, B.J.; Prudenza, S.; Magagnin, L.; Langfelder, G.; et al. Accuracy of a new electronic nose for prostate cancer diagnosis in urine samples. Int. J. Urol. 2022, 29, 890–896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talens, J.B.; Pelegri-Sebastia, J.; Sogorb, T.; Ruiz, J.L. Prostate cancer detection using e-nose and AI for high probability assessment. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2023, 23, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, C.-D.; Zheng, Y.-X.; Lin, H.-F.; Yang, H.-Y. Development of Electronic Nose as a Complementary Screening Tool for Breath Testing in Colorectal Cancer. Biosensors 2025, 15, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braz, D.C.; Neto, M.P.; Shimizu, F.M.; Sá, A.C.; Lima, R.S.; Gobbi, A.L.; Melendez, M.E.; Arantes, L.M.B.; Carvalho, A.L.; Paulovich, F.V.; et al. Using machine learning and an electronic tongue for discriminating saliva samples from oral cavity cancer patients and healthy individuals. Talanta 2022, 243, 123327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gómez, J.K.C.; Barrera, L.D.P.; Acevedo, C.M.D. Application of Electronic Tongue for Detection and Classification of Lead Concentrations in Coal Mining Wastewater. Environments 2025, 12, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almario, A.A.; Calabokis, O.P.; Barrera, E.A. Smart E-Tongue Based on Polypyrrole Sensor Array as Tool for Rapid Analysis of Coffees from Different Varieties. Foods 2024, 13, 3586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Magnani, G.; Giliberti, C.; Errico, D.; Stighezza, M.; Fortunati, S.; Mattarozzi, M.; Boni, A.; Bianchi, V.; Giannetto, M.; De Munari, I.; et al. Evaluation of a Voltametric E-Tongue Combined with Data Preprocessing for Fast and Effective Machine Learning-Based Classification of Tomato Purées by Cultivar. Sensors 2024, 24, 3586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, I.-S.; Byun, S.-W.; Lim, T.-B.; Park, G.-M. A Study on E-Nose System in Terms of the Learning Efficiency and Accuracy of Boosting Approaches. Sensors 2024, 24, 302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de la Rica-Martinez, A.; Martínez-Muñoz, G.; Sanjuan, M.A.; Conesa-Celdrán, A.; Garcia-Moreno, L.; Estan-Cerezo, G.; Oates, M.J.; Gonzalo-Jimenez, N.; Ruiz-Canales, A. Low-Cost Electronic Nose for the Determination of Urinary Infections. Sensors 2023, 24, 157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mostafaei, Z.; Aboonajmi, M. Data Fusion Approaches for Authenticating and Evaluating Quality of Food and Beverages. e-J. Nondestruct. Test. 2024, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Y.; Wei, X.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, J.; You, R. Research progress of electronic nose technology in exhaled breath disease analysis. Microsyst. Nanoeng. 2023, 9, 129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haq, M.Z.U.; Singh, B.; Fuku, X.; Barhoum, A.; Tian, F. A Systematic Review of the Use of Electronic Nose and Tongue Technologies for Detecting Food Contaminants. Chemosensors 2025, 13, 262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, J.; Feng, G.; Li, W.; Hao, S.; Han, S.; Zhu, Q.; Tian, B.; Duan, C.; Chu, J. Physical reservoir computing for Edge AI applications. TIMS 2025, 3, 100127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, W.; Men, H.; Shi, Y.; Ying, Y.; Liu, J.; Liu, Q. An Olfactory-Taste Synesthesia Model Combined With Electronic Nose and Electronic Tongue to Identify Flavor Substances. IEEE Sens. J. 2022, 22, 15199–15210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cui, Y.; Zheng, X.; Shen, C.; Qian, L.; Dong, H.; Liu, Q.; Chen, X.; Yang, Q.; Zhang, F.; Wang, D. Visual–Olfactory Synergistic Perception Based on Dual-Focus Imaging and a Bionic Learning Architecture. ACS Sens. 2022, 8, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rupanetti, D.; Kaabouch, N. Combining Edge Computing-Assisted Internet of Things Security with Artificial Intelligence: Applications, Challenges, and Opportunities. Appl. Sci. 2024, 14, 7104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]





| Aspect | Biomimetic Smell/Taste Biosensors | MOX/MQ Chemiresistors |
|---|---|---|
| Operating temp | Room temperature (hydrated biointerfaces; aqueous-compatible for taste) [27] | Typically 200–400 °C; heaters/micro-hotplates required [28]. |
| Selectivity | Molecular recognition → high specificity; multiplexable panels of OR/OBP [27]. | Cross-sensitive; selectivity via arrays + ML [29]. |
| Typical LOD | fM–pM (e.g., OR-CNT-FET 1 fM geraniol; reports down to 0.04 fM) [30]. | ppb–ppm typical (low-ppb possible in lab) [31]. |
| Response/recovery | Seconds–minutes (binding/transport limited) [27]. | Seconds response; recovery often tens of seconds and condition-dependent [32]. |
| Humidity effects/drift | Bio-layers need hydration; stability depends on immobilization [33]. | Humidity strongly interferes; pronounced short/long-term drift [34]. |
| Power | Low (no heater) [35]. | Tens of mW typical (e.g., ~60 mW @ 400 °C; ~20 mW in SiC design) [36]. |
| Maintenance | Bio-layer shelf-life/rehydration; OBPs thermally robust (~70–75 °C) [37]. | Periodic calibration; contamination/heater aging [32]. |
| Sample compatibility | Works in aqueous/complex matrices (taste) and gas (olfaction) with interfaces [35]. | Optimized for gas-phase VOCs/inorganics at elevated T [38]. |
| Multiplexing | Natural panelization with multiple ORs/OBPs [33]. | Arrays are standard in e-nose systems [29]. |
| Warm-up | Minimal (no heater) [35]. | Thermal stabilization needed [38]. |
| Domain | Count | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| MDPI | 56 | 38.10% |
| Elsevier/ScienceDirect | 38 | 25.85% |
| ACS Publications | 13 | 8.84% |
| Wiley Online Library | 9 | 6.12% |
| Nature/Springer Nature (nature.com) | 7 | 4.76% |
| SpringerOpen/BMC (non-nature.com) | 3 | 2.04% |
| Frontiers | 4 | 2.72% |
| RSC Publishing | 2 | 1.36% |
| IEEE Xplore | 2 | 1.36% |
| ECS Digital Library | 2 | 1.36% |
| AAAS (Science Advances) | 2 | 1.36% |
| Others | 9 | 6.12% |
| Total | 147 | 100% |
| Recognition Element & Sensitive Material | Transducer Type | Target Analyte(s) | Detection Limit/Range | Selectivity & Binding/Energy Constants | Application | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Venus flytrap domain (T1R2) on CNTs | CNT-FET | Sucrose & saccharin | 0.1 fM; 0.1 fM–1 μM | Selectivity for cyclamate, tasteless disaccharide, l-monosodium glutamate & denatonium; Kd ≈ 2.05 × 10−11, 6.88 × 10−12 M | Sweetener detection in food/beverage quality control | [59] |
| Nanovesicles containing AmGr10 | Nanovesicle-FET | l-Monosodium glutamate | 100 pM; 100 pM–10 μM | Selective versus sucrose & phenylthiocarbamide; Kd ≈ 1.77 × 108 M−1 | Liquid food analysis | [60] |
| Nanovesicles containing rTRPV1 | CNT-FET | Capsaicin, allicin, sanshool | LOD ≈ 1 pM; responses demonstrated up to µM level | Selective to TRPV1 agonists; negligible response to non-pungent tastants | Pungency evaluation, food screening | [61] |
| hTAS2R46 nanodiscs | CNT-FET | Denatonium benzoate | LOD ≈ 0.1 nM; range 0.1 nM–1 µM | Specific to denatonium; minimal cross-response; Kd/Ka: Equilibrium constant = 0.1354 pM−1, i.e., Kd ≈ 7.4 nM | Bitterant detection | [62] |
| hT1R1 immobilized on a glassy carbon electrode (GCE) | Electrochemical (signal amplification on GCE) | Sodium glutamate, disodium inosinate, disodium guanylate, disodium succinate | Detection limits: 1.5 pM, 0.86 pM, 2.3 pM & 0.86 pM; detection range 10−14–10−12 M | Association constants Ka ≈ 7.42 × 10−16–2.25 × 10−15 M | Food taste analysis | [63] |
| Venus flytrap domain of T1R1 on an electrode | Electrochemical (differential pulse voltammetry | Inosine-5′-monophosphate, monosodium L-glutamate, beefy meaty peptide, sodium succinate | Detection limit ~0.1 pM; ranges 10−13–10−6 M (IMP), 10−13–10−8 M (MSG) and 10−13–10−7 M (BMP) | RSD 2.3–3.2% | Food taste analysis | [64] |
| TRPV1 cell membrane on an electrode | Electrochemical (impedance-based) | Capsaicin, allicin, sanshool | Detection limits 1 × 10−15 M, 1 × 10−14 M & 1 × 10−15 M; detection ranges up to 10−12 M | Association constants Ka ≈ 3.52 × 10−16–5.02 × 10−15 M | Food additive analysis | [65] |
| Odorant-binding protein-based biosensor | Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) | Bitter taste molecules | Linear response 10−9–10−6 mg/mL | OBP selectivity for bitter ligands | Bitter taste detection | [66] |
| Recognition Element & Sensitive Material | Transducer Type | Target Analyte(s) | Detection Limit/Range | Selectivity & Binding/Energy Constants | Application | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR2J2, OR2W1, TAAR5 & TAS2R38 on multi-channel CNTs | Multi-channel swCNT-FET | Octanol, hexanol, trimethylamine, goitrin | pM (100 fM–100 nM) | Kd ≈ 7.53 × 1012–1.78 × 1012 M−1 for different receptors | Food safety | [67] |
| hOR2AG1 & hOR3A1 on graphene-mediated FET | GMs-FET | Amyl butyrate & helional | 0.1 fM; 0.1 fM–10 pM | Selective against butyl & pentyl butyrate; piperonal & safrole; Kd ≈ 2.93 × 1015 & 9.6 × 1014 M−1 | Spice industry | [68] |
| Micelle-stabilized ODR-10 receptor | Electrolyte–insulator–semiconductor FET | Diacetyl | 10 fM; 1 fM–10 nM | Selective versus 2-butanone & 3-methyl-2-butanone; K ≈ 1.7 × 10−12 M | Alcoholic beverages | [69] |
| OBP-derived peptide on CNT-FET | CNT-FET | 3-Methyl-1-butanol | 1 fM; 1 fM–10 nM | Interferents: 2-methylbutane, methyl isopropyl ketone, 3-methyl-1-butanethiol, isobutyl acetate, 3-methylbutanal & 3-methylbutanoic acid; Kd ≈ 5.25 × 1013 M−1 | Pathogen-contaminated food | [1] |
| Mutant porcine OBP (pOBP-F88W) | Water-gated OFET | Carvone enantiomers | LOD = 50 pM; LQ = 150 pM | Enantioselectivity factor ≈ 6.3; Kd = 0.81 nM (S), 20 nM (R) | Chiral flavour QC | [35] |
| hOR1A2 nanodiscs on CNT-FET | CNT-FET | Geraniol, citronellol | LOD = 1 fM (geraniol), 10 fM (citronellol); range up to 1 µM | Specific binding; discriminated rose odorants from other compounds | Fragrance analysis | [70] |
| TAAR13c/d nanodiscs | Side-gated graphene FET | Cadaverine, putrescine | LOD = 1 fM; range 1 fM–10 pM | Highly specific; stable under low humidity | Fish spoilage monitoring | [71] |
| OBP14 from Apis mellifera | rGO-FET | Homovanillic acid (HVA), methyl vanillate, eugenol | LOD ≈ 100 nM; range 100 nM–3.3 mM | Binding order HVA > methyl vanillate > eugenol; Kd range ≈ 4 μM to 3.3 mM | Cosmetic/fragrance detection | [72] |
| ORP (olfactory receptor-derived peptide) | Flexible SWCNT sensor | Trimethylamine (TMA) | LOD = 0.1 ppq; broad dynamic range | High selectivity to TMA; effective even in seafood matrices | Real-time fish spoilage detection | [73] |
| Water-gated OFET with porcine OBP | WGOFET | S(+)/R(−)-carvone | LOD = 1 pM; range 1 pM–5 nM | Enantioselectivity factor ≈ 6.3; K ≈ 0.81 nM | Mint flavour QC | [74] |
| OBP-derived peptide (ORP) used | Single-walled CNTs (SWCNTs) on silicon pyramid structure | Trimethylamine (TMA) vapor | LOD ≈ As low as 0.01 parts per trillion (ppt) | Highly selective vs. other amines; stable >30 days | Fish spoilage detection | [75] |
| Peptide receptor derived from olfactory receptor | Bioelectronic nose (CNT-FET) | Trimethylamine (TMA) | LOD = 10 fM | Selective detection in mixed seafood vapors | Seafood freshness quality control | [76] |
| ORP (olfactory peptide) + microfluidic system | Microfluidic-integrated bioelectronic nose | Trimethylamine (TMA) | LOD = 10 ppt | Good selectivity in vapor phase; reusable | Portable gas-phase seafood monitoring | [77] |
| ORP immobilized using Steglich esterification + NCL | Modified CNT-FET | Trimethylamine (TMA) | LOD = 0.01 ppt | Improved binding efficiency; high specificity | Environmental and food odor sensing | [78] |
| Gold disk electrodes with liposomes containing Or10a, Or22a & Or71a | Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) | Methyl salicylate, methyl hexanoate, 4-ethylguaiacol | Detection limits 1 pM, 1 fM & 0.1 fM; detection ranges 10−13–10−7 M, 10−15–10−7 M & 10−17–10−9 M | – | Cosmetics & medicine | [79] |
| Olfactory receptor OR7D4 immobilized via His-tag on gold electrode | Amperometric (SWV) | Androstenone (boar taint compound) | Linear response 10−14–10−4 M | OR specificity for androstenone | Meat quality control | [80] |
| Study/System | Data & Sensors | Machine Learning Method | Performance Metrics | Application | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial olfactory system based on human ORs | Conductance patterns from human OR nanodiscs on synaptic devices; single & mixed short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) at 3 ppm | Principal component analysis (PC1 + PC2 explained 97.9% variance) followed by custom artificial neural network (27 input –14 hidden –4 output neurons) | Detection limits 0.07–1.30 ppm; odor recognition accuracy reached 100% after 100 training steps (epochs) and remained 90–100% after 1 000 epochs; mixed-odorant recognition accuracy reached 91.6% | Molecular odorant discrimination & neuromorphic sensing | [125] |
| Data fusion of electronic nose and electronic tongue for prostate cancer detection | Breath and urine samples analyzed by gas sensor arrays (e Nose) and electrochemical electrodes (e Tongue) | Data fusion with multivariate classification algorithms (e.g., support vector machines, principal component analysis, discriminant function analysis) | Combining sensory data yielded 100% classification accuracy for distinguishing prostate cancer, benign prostate hyperplasia, prostatitis and controls; e Tongue alone achieved 92.9% accuracy | Non-invasive prostate cancer diagnosis | [126] |
| Neuromorphic artificial gustation with layered GO membranes | Layered graphene oxide (GO) membranes operating in liquid; generates ionic current patterns in response to basic tastes (sweet, sour, salty, bitter) and complex beverages (Coke, coffee, wine, etc.) | Reservoir computing: on-membrane ionic dynamics act as physical reservoir; processed by external neural network classifier | ~98.5% accuracy for known basic tastes; 75–90% accuracy for novel taste inputs; ~96% for complex beverages; on-membrane memory retention up to ~140 s | Artificial tongue for beverage classification, taste restoration, health and authenticity monitoring | [127] |
| Adaptive ML for forensic e-nose (VOC scent signatures) | Portable e-nose arrays measuring biosamples (breath/tissue volatiles) | Adaptive machine learning pipeline with transfer learning | 98.1% (postmortem vs. antemortem), 97.2% (human vs. animal); high-resolution PMI estimation | Forensic scent detection | [128] |
| Prototype-Optimized UDA for drifted e-nose | MOx e-nose data with temporal drift | Unsupervised domain adaptation using dynamic Transformer encoder + prototype learning | Outperforms prior UDA baselines; average accuracy improved by ~11%, reaching 92.67% on CQU dataset | Sensor drift compensation in e-nose | [105] |
| Semi-supervised deep learning for gas-sensor drift | Resistive gas sensor arrays | Semi-supervised domain-adaptive CNN using ensemble classifiers, multi-level features, MMD-based pretraining loss, and center loss | 76.06% accuracy (long-drift), 82.07% accuracy (short-drift), R2 = 0.804 in regression, outperforming conventional methods | Drift compensation in e-nose systems | [129] |
| Cross-domain active learning for e-nose drift | Electronic nose datasets collected across time to reflect domain drift (sensor aging) | Cross-Domain Active Learning (CDAL): Active Learning (Hellinger Distance) + Domain Adaptation (MMD), combined via weighted sample selection | ~10% higher average accuracy than baselines; short-term drift accuracy > 82% with ~30 labeled samples | Drift compensation in e-nose systems | [130] |
| In-sensor reservoir computing olfactory neuron | Bionic olfactory neuron device: OFET array providing in-sensor reservoir dynamics | Physical reservoir computing (RC) + KNN classifier | 100% accuracy for 8 gases; 99.04% accuracy for 26 gases (including mixtures, isomers, homologs) | Edge olfaction/neuromorphic sensing | [22] |
| Cascadable OECT for multimodal edge sensing | cv-OECT (vertical-traverse organic electrochemical transistor) acting as a multimodal sensor (ions, light, temperature, ECG, taste) | In-hardware neural network for edge computing via reservoir computing, SNN/ANN with STDP | Demonstrated multi-modal sensing capabilities; 10-bit analog memory with >10,000 s retention; simulated 100% classification accuracy for ECG/MNIST datasets | On-device AI for biosensing/neuromorphic sensing | [131] |
| E-nose + E-tongue fusion for prostate cancer | Breath e-nose and urine e-tongue (C110/250BT electrodes) | PCA/DFA/SVM/SVM-KNN/Random Forest fusion techniques | Fusion: 100% accuracy; E-tongue alone: 92.9% accuracy | Non-invasive prostate cancer diagnosis | [109] |
| E-nose for prostate cancer in urine (clinical) | Urinary VOCs via e-nose | Pattern recognition using sensitivity, specificity, AUC (no ML specified) | Sensitivity: 85.2%; Specificity: 79.1%; AUC: 0.821 | Non-invasive prostate cancer diagnosis | [132] |
| Neural-network e-nose for prostate cancer (urine) | MOOSY-32 e-nose analyzing urinary VOCs | Feedforward neural network with redundancy strategy | Recall (sensitivity) of 91% for detecting prostate cancer | Rapid, non-invasive point-of-care prostate cancer detection | [133] |
| Breath e-nose for colorectal cancer screening | Exhaled breath VOCs via e-nose | Supervised classification (e.g., SVM, RF) | Overall: AUC 0.87, sensitivity 0.81, specificity 0.85; Early-stage: sens 0.90, spec 0.85; Non-smokers: sens 0.88, spec 0.92 | CRC complementary screening tool (adjunct to FIT) | [134] |
| E-tongue impedance + ML for oral cancer (saliva) | Microfluidic impedance e-tongue analyzing saliva | Supervised classifiers (SVM-RBF, Random Forest, etc.) | >80% accuracy (binary classification), ~70% for multi-class; improved with clinical data | Non-invasive oral cancer diagnostics | [135] |
| E-tongue for wastewater Pb detection | Electronic tongue analyzing coal mining wastewater VOC/signals | Supervised classifiers (SVM, Random Forest, k-NN, Naïve Bayes, QDA) | Accuracy ~90%; Precision ~90–91%; AUC ~94–94.5%; high sensitivity/specificity and F1-score all similarly high | Environmental monitoring (lead detection in wastewater) | [136] |
| Polypyrrole smart e-tongue for coffee quality | Polypyrrole-based voltammetric sensor array (7 doped electrodes) | PCNN (PCA + neural networks) & cluster analysis | Accurate discrimination of five coffee varieties via unique fingerprints | Coffee quality/authenticity detection | [137] |
| Voltammetric e-tongue + custom preprocessing | Voltammetric e-tongue analyzing tomato purée signals | Custom preprocessing + LDA classifier | Average F1-score: 99.26% (across 100 runs) | Rapid tomato cultivar discrimination | [138] |
| Learning-efficient deep models for e-nose datasets | MOx sensor wind-tunnel dataset (public) + custom dataset in hood setting | Comparison of deep models (DNN, CNN, LSTM) vs. boosting models | Boosting models showed faster learning and higher robustness/accuracy | Algorithm benchmarking for e-nose signals | [139] |
| Low-cost e-nose for urinary infections | Urine headspace detected by portable e-nose | PCA; SVM classifier | PCA: 49% accuracy; SVM: 74% accuracy | Point-of-care UTI detection | [140] |
| Data fusion review for food/drink authentication | E-nose, e-tongue, imaging (electronic eye) | Overview of low-, mid-, high-level fusion strategies | Improved classification accuracy versus single modality | Food/drink authentication | [141] |
| E-nose advances for VOC breath diagnosis | Exhaled-VOC e-nose platforms | Pattern recognition & deep learning (review) | High sensitivity & rapid response (as reviewed) | Disease diagnostics via breath analysis | [142] |
| Systematic review of e-nose/e-tongue for contaminants | Multiple sensor modalities (e-nose, e-tongue) | Survey of ML/chemometric methods (PCA, LDA, PLS-DA, SVM, ANN, etc.) | High sensitivities reported in case studies (e.g., 100% for soft-rot); overall aggregate accuracies (like 96.83%, 94%) are not explicitly reported | Food contaminant detection | [143] |
| Reservoir computing overview for edge AI sensing | Physical reservoir devices (e.g., memristive, ionic/optoelectronic) | Survey of physical reservoir computing | Emphasized design for low-latency, energy-efficient inference | Edge biosensing & multimodal fusion | [144] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Khalid, Z.; Chen, Y.; Liu, X.; Noureen, B.; Chen, Y.; Wang, M.; Ma, Y.; Du, L.; Wu, C. Recent Advances and Unaddressed Challenges in Biomimetic Olfactory- and Taste-Based Biosensors: Moving Towards Integrated, AI-Powered, and Market-Ready Sensing Systems. Sensors 2025, 25, 7000. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25227000
Khalid Z, Chen Y, Liu X, Noureen B, Chen Y, Wang M, Ma Y, Du L, Wu C. Recent Advances and Unaddressed Challenges in Biomimetic Olfactory- and Taste-Based Biosensors: Moving Towards Integrated, AI-Powered, and Market-Ready Sensing Systems. Sensors. 2025; 25(22):7000. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25227000
Chicago/Turabian StyleKhalid, Zunaira, Yuqi Chen, Xinyi Liu, Beenish Noureen, Yating Chen, Miaomiao Wang, Yao Ma, Liping Du, and Chunsheng Wu. 2025. "Recent Advances and Unaddressed Challenges in Biomimetic Olfactory- and Taste-Based Biosensors: Moving Towards Integrated, AI-Powered, and Market-Ready Sensing Systems" Sensors 25, no. 22: 7000. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25227000
APA StyleKhalid, Z., Chen, Y., Liu, X., Noureen, B., Chen, Y., Wang, M., Ma, Y., Du, L., & Wu, C. (2025). Recent Advances and Unaddressed Challenges in Biomimetic Olfactory- and Taste-Based Biosensors: Moving Towards Integrated, AI-Powered, and Market-Ready Sensing Systems. Sensors, 25(22), 7000. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25227000

