See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/335247922

Room temperature chemiresistive gas sensors: challenges and strategies—a

mini review

Article  in  Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics · September 2019

DOI: 10.1007/s10854-019-02025-1

CITATIONS READS

28 891

5 authors, including:

Parthasarathy Srinivasan Madeshwari Ezhilan

Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham Chennai SASTRA Deemed University
31 PUBLICATIONS   347 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   172 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Arockia Jayalatha Jayanth Karanam

SASTRA University SASTRA University
28 PUBLICATIONS   322 CITATIONS    63 PUBLICATIONS   598 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Design and development of sensors for exhaled breath analysis View project

Developing Biosensors for Methylglyoxal View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Parthasarathy Srinivasan on 29 October 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-019-02025-1

REVIEW

Room temperature chemiresistive gas sensors: challenges

and strategies—a mini review
Parthasarathy Srinivasan1 · Madeshwari Ezhilan1 · Arockia Jayalatha Kulandaisamy1 · K. Jayanth Babu1 ·
John Bosco Balaguru Rayappan1

Received: 11 April 2019 / Accepted: 12 August 2019 / Published online: 19 August 2019
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
One of the sources of environmental threat in recent years is the leakage of toxic gases from various industries. Sensors to
detect these gases in trace level concentrations are highly required to ensure a safe living environment. In this context, many
types of gas sensors such as calorimetric, conductometric, potentiometric, catalytic, and chemiresistive types have been
employed to detect these gases. Among them, chemiresistive type sensors have been widely employed due to high selectivity,
sensitivity, simplicity in fabrication, compactness, lower operating temperature, and low power consumption. Chemiresistive
sensors are designed with inbuilt micro-heaters for improving the sensing response. However, sensors operated at elevated
operating temperatures would significantly affect the stability of the sensor due to grain growth. To address this concern,
many efforts have been progressing over the years towards the development of room temperature operated gas sensors. In
this review, room temperature operated gas sensors developed for the detection of ammonia, acetaldehyde, ethanol, nitrogen
dioxide, ozone, and aromatic VOCs have been discussed. In addition, the major challenges possessed by the sensors operated
at elevated temperatures such as grain growth, change of conductivity, and variations in charge transport characteristics have
been addressed. Also, the strategies to minimize the aforementioned challenges have been highlighted.

1 Introduction safety of the living environment. For this objective, differ-

Technological developments have made significant contribu-
tions to the society in terms of industrialization and auto-
mation. Establishment of sophisticated automobiles and a
wide variety of industries such as petrochemical, rubber,
textile, oil refinery, natural gas, paper manufacturing, food
processing, and coal refineries have significantly increased
the global socio-economic status. However, the leakage of
toxic and inflammable chemicals or gases from these indus-
tries have a major threat to the society as they affect the
eco-system and ultimately the human health cycle. Thus, it
is imperative to continuously monitor the trace level con-
centrations of gases released by industries for ensuring the
Parthasarathy Srinivasan and Madeshwari Ezhilan have
contributed equally.
* John Bosco Balaguru Rayappan
rjbosco@ece.sastra.edu
1
Centre for Nanotechnology & Advanced Biomaterials
(CeNTAB) & School of Electrical & Electronics
Engineering, SASTRA Deemed University,
Thanjavur 613 401, Tamil Nadu, India
ent types of gas sensors such as calorimetric, conductomet-
ric, potentiometric, catalytic, and chemiresistive have been
developed and utilized [1]. Among them, chemiresistive type
sensors are widely used in real-time applications owing to
their selectivity, sensitivity, simplicity in fabrication, com-
pactness, lower operating temperature, and lower power
consumption [2–6]. The variations in electrical resistance
of the sensing element under chemical environment govern
the principle of chemiresistive type sensors. The change in
resistance of sensing elements depends on the type of mate-
rials used as sensing elements and the nature of the target
gas. Metal oxides, conducting polymers, and carbon nano-
tubes have been utilized as sensing materials in chemiresis-
tive gas sensors [7]. Among them, metal oxide materials
and their various forms have been investigated extensively
over the past few decades. ZnO [8, 9], CuO [10, 11], MgO
[12], ­TiO2 [13–15], ­MoO3 [16, 17], ­SnO2 [18], ­V2O5 [19],
­CeO2 [20], CdO [21], ­WO3 [17, 22, 23], ­Ga2O3 [24], ­ZrO2
[25], NiO [26, 27], ­Fe2O3 [28], ­Co3O4 [29, 30] and many
more have been used as sensing elements in chemi-resistive
sensors owing to their tunable transport properties. Usually,
micro-heaters are potentially integrated with these sensing

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

15826
elements for improving the sensing response. However,
the higher operating temperature of these sensors results in
poor stability as the function of the usage period [31, 32].
In the nanoscale regime, the growth of inner grains of sens-
ing element under elevated operating temperature is being
considered as one of the challenges in establishing the sta-
bility of the sensors. Thus, it is imperative to design room
temperature operated gas sensor to obtain the desired figure
of merits, including long-term stability.
In this scenario, the advent of nanotechnology has made
a significant contribution to enhance the surface to volume
ratio and to engineer the microstructural properties like crys-
tallite size, preferential planes, morphology, phase separa-
tion, grains and grain boundaries of the sensing elements to
achieve desirable performances [33–35]. Because of their
controllable density of states (DOS) and quantum confine-
ment property, low-dimensional nanostructures like quantum
well, quantum wire (nanowires or nanorods) and quantum
dots have been substantially investigated [36]. Apart from
these nanostructures, many nanostructures such as nano-
spheres, nanofibers, nanosheets, nanoflakes, nanocubes,
nanoclusters, and nanoflowers of metal oxide materials have
been used as sensing elements [37–43]. These nanostruc-
tures have been synthesized employing microwave, thermal,
electrospinning, polymeric precursor method, solution com-
bustion synthesis (SCS), sputtering, electron-beam evapo-
ration, vacuum deposition, pulsed laser deposition (PLD),
chemical vapour deposition (CVD), sol–gel dip coating,
spray pyrolysis and electro-deposition [44–50] techniques.
These nanostructures have specific physical properties and
decide the rate of adsorption and desorption during the
gas–solid interaction. Doping, surface sensitization, usage
of functionalized noble metals, supplying photonic energy,
configuring a heterostructured interface with metals/metal-
oxides are the few familiar strategies to improve the sensing
response without the use of thermal energy [51–55]. During
the design of low power operated gas sensor, factors such
as power consumption, materials compatibility, and device
integration should be considered. This review highlights
these design constraints and performance characteristics of
the sensors, along with the design strategies to overcome
the challenges. Further, many investigations on room tem-
perature gas sensors with reducing and oxidizing gases have
been presented.
2 Figure of merits of gas sensors
The overall performance of gas sensors is decided by their
figure of merits such as response, selectivity, response-
recovery times, power consumption, repeatability, and sta-
bility. Response determines the lowest concentration of the
target gas to be detected [56]. In other words, it directly
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
relates to the lowest detection limit of the sensors to the
target gas. Selectivity is the sensor’s ability to discriminate
the particular gas in a mixed gas environment [57]. The time
taken by the sensor to reach a response of 90% from the
baseline and the time taken by the sensor to retrace the path
from a response of 90% are called the response and recovery
time respectively [56, 57]. Repeatability and stability refer
to the life of the fabricated sensors over a period of time.
The amount of power a sensor consumes for its operation is
referred to as the power consumption [56]. The most crucial
parameter in the fabrication of sensors as a device is power
consumption and a good sensing system should consume
less power.
2.1 Factors affecting figure of merits of gas sensors
and remedial approaches
The various constraints, which limit the figure of merits of
the gas sensors, are narrated below:
1. The materials (metal oxides, metal nitrides, metal sul-
phides, carbon nanotubes and polymers such as PANI,
PVA, PVP, PMMA) selected as gas sensing elements
determine the sensor’s stability [8, 9, 11–13, 16–19, 22,
25–27, 29, 30, 58]. Surface morphology, grain features,
and structural variations directly associate with the sen-
sor’s response, selectivity, and stability.
2. Fast response-recovery time is attributed to enhanced
oxygen adsorption sites. Some metal oxide materials are
highly catalytic and their catalytic behavior needs to be
investigated further as they provide enhanced adsorption
sites in-turn gas–solid interaction [2–6].
3. In general, the rate of adsorption and desorption can
be controlled by surface modification/functionalization/
doping strategies [59, 60]. However, in certain cases, if
the sensor possesses partial recovery/prolonged recovery
during the desorption process, the introduction of oxy-
gen in the sensing environment helps in swift recovery
[2–6, 59, 60].
4. The doping concentration or composition of sensing
elements is another vital factor that decides the sensor
stability. Hence, the selection of optimal concentration
is highly required for ensuring the enhanced sensing
response [61]. In case of doping strategy, the doping
concentration should be maintained below the solubil-
ity limit to achieve improved sensing characteristics. If
the dopant concentration exceeds the solubility limit, it
reflects in the structural, morphological, electrical, and
optical properties, which results in the unconditional
drift in the sensing response [62, 63]. On the other hand,
if the nanocomposite is chosen as a sensing element, the
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15827
molar concentration ratio between the binary/ternary/
quaternary materials should be optimally selected.
5. The higher relative humidity in the surrounding environ-
ment during the sensing measurements affect the sensor
stability in-turn unstable response behaviour. In general,
the sensing response is inversely proportional to the rela-
tive humidity. In other words, sensing response is lower
at higher humidity due to the hindrance of oxygen ions
by surface adsorbed O ­ H− ions [64]. However, the role
of relative humidity at elevated operating temperatures
are not profoundly felt as the thermal energy nullifies the
influence of surface adsorbed ­OH− ions [59, 65–67].
6. In addition, the operating temperature of the sensor has
a significant impact on the sensing performance. Most
sensors are operated at elevated temperatures to achieve
an enhanced response. The key factors affecting the
selectivity and stability at elevated temperatures are the
transformation of structural properties like separation
of phases, elongated growth of grains and unintentional
growth of grain boundaries, contact degradation, poor
adhesion properties at the surface [68–70]. The operat-
ing temperature gradient must be maintained in such
a way that two gases can be detected simultaneously.
Nevertheless, due to the higher operating temperature,
multiple gas interactions would lead to selectivity issues
[71, 72]. Hence, the difference between the lower and
upper threshold limits of operating temperature should
be maintained to detect two different target gases simul-
taneously. Cordos et al. reported the working tempera-
ture of the sensor for methane and carbon monoxide
detection as 400 and 90 °C, respectively. The variation
in the thermostatic cycle at two extreme temperatures
also enables the detection of target gases by measuring
the variation in the sensor resistance [71]. Usually, the
rate of reaction is restricted at lower temperatures, and
the rate of diffusion of target analytes is restricted at
higher operating temperatures [73]. Thus, a prominent
trade-off between the lower and higher operating tem-
peratures have to be optimized to yield better sensing
performance. The temperature at which the rate of reac-
tion equals the rate of diffusion is called as the optimal
operating temperature of the sensor [66, 73–77]. For
the simultaneous detection of two gases, maintaining
the constant surface potential of the sensing element by
temperature modulation is an alternative method, being
employed [78, 79]. The oxygen adsorption is directly
related to the operating temperature. At the elevated
operating temperature, oxygen species adsorbed as
­O2− and ­O− in-turn decides the sensor’s selectivity and
response [74, 80, 81].
7. The gas–solid interaction depends not only on the prop-
erties of the gas sensing elements but also on the proper-
ties and chemical structure of the target gas molecules.
In general, the HOMO–LUMO energy levels [82] of
the target gas have to be superimposed with the surface
energies or band energies of the metal oxide sensing
materials for better sensing characteristics [64]. On the
other hand, the chemical structure, bond-dissociation
energies, dipole moment, dissociation enthalpies, bond-
length, kinetic diameter, and ionization energy also have
significant contribution in deciding the sensing response
[83–88]. Thus, the properties of the target gas have to be
considered for better gas–solid interaction.
Inorder to minimize these issues and improve the figure
of merits, the following measures could be considered: (i)
selection of gas sensing elements with different degrees of
confinement and density of states, (ii) surface modifica-
tion of the materials with enhanced catalytic activity, (iii)
optimization of doping concentration or composition of the
material, (iv) surface sensitization of sensing elements with
noble metals, (v) photo-activated sensing surface, and (vi)
fabrication of heterostructured metals/metal oxides.
2.2 Design aspects of room temperature gas
sensors
The design of room temperature sensors with nanostructured
morphologies has significantly drawn attention from the
researchers over the years as they provide several advantages
such as long-term stability, fast switching transients, high
selectivity, enhanced sensitivity, and repeatability. The
enhanced surface catalytic activity of the nanostructures
with varying density of states and activation energy are the
key parameters contributing towards enhanced sensing
response at room temperature [89]. However, the nature
of the humid environment, low response with possible inter-
fering gases and sensors baseline drifts are considered to be
significant challenges that could occur at room temperature.
The material with anti-humidity nature (polymer-based com-
posite material) provides resistant towards the adsorption of
­OH− ions from the humid nature. Influence of potential
interferent gases during the target gas interaction could also
have significant contribution in lowering the sensing
response. This interferent effect could be eliminated if the
sensing element is supplied with either optical energy of
suitable wavelength or optimal thermal energy. In other
words, if the surface energy required to dissociate the target
gas molecules is minimum, the gas–solid interaction would
even be possible at room temperature. The surface activation
energy of the sensing element could ( be measured
) using
ΔE
Arrhenius relation as G = Go exp − kTa   , where ΔEa
denotes the activation energy, G represents conductance, G
­ O
is the temperature independent factor, k denotes Boltzmann’s
constant and T is absolute temperature. On calculating the
13

15828
slope of the trend between ln(G) and 1/T surface activation
energy can be estimated [64]. Another important design con-
straint in room temperature operated gas sensors is potential
baseline drifts. The baseline drifts can be corrected by using
suitable metal-sensing element electrical contacts. This drift
can also be controlled if the material is active enough to
adsorb and desorb the target gas molecules. The schematic
of sensors design at room and elevated operating tempera-
tures are shown in Fig. 1A1, A2 [64, 90]. From the equiva-
lent circuit, it is clearly evident that, sensors operated the
elevated temperature require an additional heater, which in-
turn increase the overall power consumption of the sensor.
Thus, room temperature operation of the gas sensor is much
required to minimize the power consumption. Hence, the
design of room temperature operated sensors has gained sig-
nificant attention in the gas sensor research.
Fig. 1  A1 Schematic of ZnO based room temperature ammonia sen-
sor design, fabrication of interdigitated electrode pattern, and its
equivalent circuit (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [64] Copy-
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
3 Role of reducing and oxidizing gases
on sensing behaviour
Variations in the electrical resistance of the sensing ele-
ment under the interaction with the chemical species form
the principle of chemiresistive type sensors [91]. The
interaction of gas molecules with the sensing elements
acts as a receptor function. The transport of charge car-
riers between the grains is referred to as a transduction
function as shown schematically in Fig. 2 [92]. This will
actively alter the resistance of the sensing element. The
ratio of resistance before and after interaction with the
gas molecule is termed as gas sensing response [92]. The
resistance variation is highly attributed to the nature of the
semiconducting material and the type of target gas [93,
right 2018 Elsevier), and A2 Schematic of Pd/WO3 based hydrogen
sensor operated at elevated temperature and its equivalent circuit
(Reproduced with permission from Ref. [90] Copyright 2015 RSC)
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15829
Fig. 2  Schematic illustration of receptor and transduction functions of metal oxide gas sensors
94]. The possible interaction between reducing or oxidiz-
ing gas and n-type or p-type material is summarized as
follows:
1. Interaction of reducing gas with n-type metal oxide:
The n-type metal oxide materials usually contain oxy-
gen deficiency and hence atmospheric oxygen is chem-
isorbed by consuming an electron from the conduction
band of the metal oxide materials. This results in the
increased resistance termed as baseline resistance (­ Ra)
[64]. In reducing gas (ethanol, formaldehyde, acetone,
ammonia, acetaldehyde, hydrogen sulphide, methane
etc.,) environment, the surface resistance decreases as
a result of increased charge carriers during gas–solid
interaction. This has further lowered the width and
height of the space charge and potential barrier respec-
tively [95].
2. Interaction of oxidizing gas with n-type metal oxide: On
the other hand, when the n-type sensing element inter-
acts with oxidizing vapours such as nitrogen dioxide,
sulphur dioxide, carbon dioxide, hydrogen peroxide and
ozone, the material’s resistance increases further from
the baseline [96].
3. Interaction of reducing gases with p-type metal oxide:
Similarly, if the sensing element is p-type and reacts
with reducing gases, its resistance increases by the
adsorption mechanism [56, 97, 98].
4. Interaction of oxidizing gas with p-type metal oxide:
When the oxidizing gas like N ­ O2 reacts with the p-type
metal oxide surface like CuO the surface conductivity
increases [99–101].
4 Room temperature gas sensors
In this part, an overview of the reported room tempera-
ture sensors have been presented. Also, the room tempera-
ture sensing characteristics of different sensors are given
in Table 1. The gases and Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOCs) that are important to be monitored in the working
ambient are highlighted. Also, sensing characteristics for
different reducing and oxidizing gases like ammonia, acet-
aldehyde, ethanol, nitrogen dioxide, and ozone detected at
room temperature are emphasized in the following section.
4.1 Ammonia sensors
Ammonia has been widely used in many industries and
is the second-ranked largest chemical in production and
use worldwide. The natural presence of ammonia in the
environment is in the ppb level [137]. The human expo-
sure limits for ammonia are 25 ppm and 35 ppm for long
and short-term exposures [138–140]. Ammonia sensors
have generally been used in many industries such as agri-
culture, hydrogen fuels, automotive, defense, medical
diagnostics, and food processing industries [141, 142].
­SnO2, ZnO, V ­ 2O5, ITO, W
­ O3, ­MoO3, and ­TiO2 [141] are
the materials used in the fabrication of ammonia sensors.
ZnO is preferred among them because of its large bandgap,
electron mobility, and chemical stability. Series of room
temperature ammonia sensors have been reported using
undoped and doped ZnO thin films as sensing elements.
13

15830 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847

Table 1  List of room temperature gas sensors reported for different gases and their sensing characteristics
Gases Material Morphology LOD (ppm) Response References

Nitrogen dioxide ­(NO2) Si NWs/WO3 nanowire com- Cactus like nanowires 2 2.88a [102]
posites
In (OH)3/rGO composites Loosely hierarchical flower 1 290b [103]
morphology
In2TiO5–rutile composite nano- Porous composite nanotubes 4.04 1.33c [104]
tubes
V2O5 Nanorods 5 2.42a [99]
rGO–CNT–SnO2 hybrids Plate morphology 5 2.53b [105]
MWCNTs-WO3 nanoparticles Nanotubes 0.1 14d [100]
hybrid on a PET substrate
Tellurium Nanotubes 0.0005 – [101]
AgNPs–SnO2–rGO Plate morphology 5 2.17b [106]
TeO2 Hexagonal tube with porous 100 75e [107]
structure
Dodecyl benzene sulfonic acid Tiny globules with uniform and 5 12d [108]
(DBSA) doped PPy-WO3 porous morphology
CNTs/SnO2 Nanotubes with bamboo like 0.05 10f [109]
structure
Graphene—wrapped ­WO3 Nanosphere enwrapped with 7 40.8 g [110]
gauze-like GR nanosheets
Ozone ­(O3) ZnO–SnO2 Needle like structures 0.02 8.0b [111]
Core–shell Au@TiO2 Spherical and oval faceted 2.5 3.27b [112]
structures
SnO2–TX Agglomerated and oriented 0.5 210a [113]
nanorods
ZnO Circular spread—agglomerated 0.016 3.5c [114]
nanograins
In2O3 Small and large mesoporous 0.05 10a [115]
structures
Pt/TiO2–SnO2 Porous circular morphology 2.5 1082a [116]
Ammonia Polyaniline film Nano fibrous 5 ~28f [117]
Tungsten sulphide ­(WS2) Nanoflakes 5 73b [118]
Copper nanoparticles interca- Non-uniform grains 1 86h [119]
lated-polyaniline nanocom-
posites
ZnO Nanospheres 25 233b [61]
rGO-decorated ­TiO2 Spherical particles covered by 5 5.5a [120]
nanosheets
rGO encapsulated ­Co3O4 Nanofibers 5 53.6f [121]
Acetaldehyde Co doped ZnO Spherical particles and nanorods 10 74d [122]
Vanadium pentoxide (­ V2O5) Nanoflowers 100 27.90b [123]
(Co, Ni, and Cu) doped ZnO Branched nanorods, nanorods, 10 800b, 2.59b and 21.36b [124]
and agglomeration of particles
Amines Pigment sensitized T
­ iO2 Dense columnar nanostructure 0.1 11.3 ± 0.15i, [125]
5.6 ± 0.13i,
1.12 ± 0.08i,
1.33 ± 0.07i

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15831

Table 1  (continued)
Gases Material Morphology LOD (ppm) Response References
j
Ethanol TiO2 – 10 0.1 [126]
b
Ag@TiO2 nanoparticles Spherical nanoparticles 0.15 1.04 [127]
b
Ag@SnO2 Core–shell nanoparticles 50 2.24 [128]
k
Silicon Highly porous pillar-shaped 50 7 [129]
nanostructures
ITO-polydiallyldimethylammo- Smooth and homogeneous 80 ` ~ 3.5a [130]
nium chloride surface
Te–V2O5 Nanorods 5 ` ~ 1.1b [131]
l
α-Fe2O3/ZnO Nanowires 100 9.1 [132]
Single walled carbon nanotubes Nanofibers <50 – [133]
(SWCNT)
Indium oxide ­(In2O3) Cubic 100 1.4b [134]
SnO2 Nanobelts 20 – [135]
ZnO2 – 10 – [136]
a
 S = Rg/Ra
b
 S = Ra/Rg
c
 S(%) = |Ra − Rg|/Rg
d
 S(%) = (Ra − Rg)/Ra × 100
e
 S(%) = (Ga − Gg)/Gg × 100
f
 S = |Rg − Ra|/Ra
g
 S(%) = (Ig − Ia)/Ia × 100
h
 S(%) = (Ia − Ig)/Ig × 100
i
 S(%) = abs(Ig − Ia)/Ia × 100
j
 S(%) = (|Rg − Ra|/Ra) × 100
k
 S = (Cg − Ca)/Ca
l
 S(%) = (Va − Vg)/Va × 100

The possible ammonia interaction mechanism is summa-
rized below and expressed through the Eqs. (1, 2),
O2(atmosphere) + e−(ZnO surface) → O−2(ZnO surface)
(1)
NH3 + 3O−2(ad) → 2N2 + 6H2 O + 6e−
(2)
Undoped ZnO thin film showed a selective response
towards ammonia at room temperature with fast switching
transients. Uniformly distributed spherical granular mor-
phology enhanced the surface reaction and rapid transport
of electrons between the grains. The surface morphology
of undoped ZnO thin film and the corresponding sensing
profile is shown in Fig. 3a, b [61].
Another method used to improve the sensing characteris-
tics is to modify the metal oxide properties through the dop-
ing process. Transition metal dopants like Co, Ni, Fe, and
Cu were used as dopants in ZnO to enhance their ammonia
sensing characteristics at room temperature. The comparable
ionic radii of Ni and Zn ions resulted in the substitution of
Ni ions in the crystal structure of ZnO [62]. Rambu et al.
have investigated the ammonia sensing characteristics of
spin coated Ni-doped ZnO films [63]. The lower and upper
detection ranges were found to be between 25 and 1000 ppm
[143]. On the other hand, Cu dopants facilitated the oxygen
adsorption ability of ZnO thin film and thus enhanced the
solid–gas interaction [144]. Cu-doped films showed quick
response and recovery in 30 and 14 s respectively towards
50 ppm of ammonia.
Interestingly, various combinations of metal oxides,
sulphides, and nitrides have also been investigated for the
fabrication of room temperature ammonia sensor. Li et al.
reported that ammonia sensor based on tungsten sulphide
nanoflakes has reached [118] a detection limit of 1 ppm and
indicated the importance of solvation assisted reaction and
adsorbed ammonia.
Li et al. [120] examined the ammonia sensing properties
using rGO decorated with T ­ iO2 and found that the lowest
detection limit was 5 ppm. The ­TiO2 microsphere morphol-
ogy enhanced by rGO has led to better sensing character-
istics and is shown in Fig. 4a–d. Similarly, rGO decorated

13

15832
(a)
Fig. 3  a Morphology of undoped ZnO thin film, and b its corresponding room temperature ammonia sensing response (Reproduced with per-
mission from Ref. [61] Copyright 2013 Elsevier)
­Co3O4 was used to detect ammonia, and the lowest detec-
tion limit was 5 ppm [121]. The schematic illustration of
ammonia sensing behaviour using rGO decorated C ­ o3O4 is
shown in Fig. 5.
Dislocation based growth is also one of the strategies
adapted for improving the sensing performance. In this line,
we recently investigated the room temperature ammonia
sensing characteristics of screw dislocated ZnO nanowires
synthesized using successive ionic layer absorption and reac-
tion (SILAR) technique. Formation of screw dislocated ZnO
nanowires occurred through sequential stages are shown in
Fig. 6. Successive morphological transformation of beads,
nanoflakes, clustered nanoflakes, nanoflowers and finally the
twisted nanowires were obtained as a function of increasing
deposition cycles.
Screw dislocated nanowires exhibited good sensing
response of 291 with the response and recovery times of
39 and 17 s respectively. The enhanced sensing response
was reported due to the effect of quantum size effect and
confinement of charge carriers [84–86, 145]. Superimpos-
ing of energy levels of ZnO with molecular energy levels
of ammonia and contribution of lone pairs of electrons
could also be the reason for selective detection. Besides,
the resonant matching of Zn subshells with the 2pz levels of
ammonia and nucleophilic substitution of ammonia made
the sensing to occur at room temperature [85, 86]. Native
surface defects at acceptor and donor levels would intrinsi-
cally vary the electrical characteristics and sensing response.
Also, the reduced grain and grain boundary resistances due
to the screw dislocations might have improved the sensing
response [87, 146, 147]. Ammonia sensing scheme of screw
dislocated ZnO nanowires is shown in Fig. 7.
Ceramic electrodes have also been used for ammonia
detection at room temperature. Liu et al. reported the room
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
12
10
In Air (b) In Air
11
10 Ammonia IN
Resistance (Ω)
T = 20 s
Res T = 25 s
Rec
10
10
Steady state
Ammonia OUT
25 ppm
9
10
0 100 200 300
Time (s)
temperature ammonia sensing properties using iridium
doped platinum ceramic electrodes. The electrochemical
way of detecting ammonia at room temperature has been
reported. The schematic shown in Fig. 8 exhibits the elec-
trochemical ammonia sensing set up [148]. The influence of
Ir dopant on ammonia sensing properties were investigated,
and the sensing response increased from 1.14 to 12.06 µA
­ppm−1 ­cm2 when Ir-doped platinum electrode was intro-
duced [148].
Polymer-based ammonia detection at room temperature
has also been investigated over the years. Kumar et al. [117]
reported the ammonia sensing characteristics with the lowest
detection limit of 5 ppm using polyaniline (PANI) film depos-
ited on flexible polyethylene terephthalate (PET) substrates
employing a polymerization technique. The schematic rep-
resentation of PANI film preparation and sensor fabrication
is depicted in Fig. 9. Further, the reprotonation and depro-
tonation scheme of ammonia with PANI is reported. Also,
the sensor showed response at different concentration levels
started from 5 ppm to 1000 ppm with better repeatability.
Copper has also been intercalated with PANI to improve
ammonia sensing properties and thus to minimize the
detection limit. The lowest detection limit of 1 ppm was
achieved by Patil et al. [119] using copper activated PANI
thin films. Cu intercalation on PANI improves the surface
catalytic properties, which facilitate the enhanced charge
transfer characteristics. Also, Cu intercalation improves
the surface adsorption–desorption processes and results in
enhanced response kinetics. As reported by Patil et al. [119],
the deprotonation-reprotonation scheme of PANI results in
effective oxidation of ammonia at room temperature and
hence the sensing response. However, the partial recovery
of ammonia was observed for as-prepared PANI nanostruc-
ture due to the structural stability of PANI. While Cu was
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15833

Fig. 4  a Morphology of pure ­TiO2 microspheres, and b–d rGO decorated ­TiO2 microspheres (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [120]
Copyright 2016 Elsevier)

intercalated with the PANI matrix, the fast desorption pro-

cess lead to fast switching transients (response-recovery
profiles) and reduced the minimum detection limit to 1 ppm.

4.2 Acetaldehyde sensors

Very few reports are available for the room temperature

Fig. 5  Schematic illustration of ammonia sensing mechanism of rGO
encapsulated ­CO3O4 (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [121]
Copyright 2016 Elsevier)
acetaldehyde sensor. Acetaldehyde is an aromatic com-
pound, which is widely produced in chemical industries
[149]. Acetaldehyde is majorly obtained as an intermedi-
ate product in acetic acid production. Also, it has been
widely used as a quality indicator of fresh fruits and fruits
juices [150]. The continuous inhalation of acetaldehyde at
a concentration higher than 50 ppm would lead to various
side effects, including pulmonary edema and skin diseases
[122]. According to the US Environmental Agency &

13

15834 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847

Fig. 6  Morphological transfor-
mation of twisted nanowires
(Reproduced with permission
from Ref. [64] Copyright 2018
Elsevier)

Fig. 7  Ammonia sensing scheme of screw dislocated ZnO nanowires (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [64] Copyright 2018 Elsevier)

OSHA, acetaldehyde is one of the 33 major air pollutants,
and the human exposure limit for acetaldehyde is 25 ppm
for 8  h weighted time average [151]. Hence, real-time
detection of acetaldehyde in the ambient environment is a
pressing need. Investigations have been carried out with
ZnO sensor for room temperature acetaldehyde sensing.
ZnO nanoplatelets like morphology for enhanced acetal-
dehyde sensing characteristics were reported, and the sens-
ing mechanism is depicted in Fig. 10 [59]. The possible
reaction of acetaldehyde sensing is given in Eqs. (3) [152,
153],
2CH3 CHO + 5O−2 (ZnO surface) → 4CO2 ↑
(3)
+ 4H2 O ↑ +5e− (ZnO surface)
The reaction of acetaldehyde with surface adsorbed
oxygen molecules gives raise to C ­ O2 and H­ 2O with the
liberation of electrons. These electrons are responsible for
the change in resistance [152, 153]. Doping of cobalt in

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15835
Fig. 8  Scheme of three-electrode system for ammonia sensing
(Reproduced with permission from Ref. [148] Copyright 2016 Else-
vier)
ZnO further enhanced the acetaldehyde sensing proper-
ties at room temperature. Shalini et al. investigated the
acetaldehyde sensors operated at ambient temperature
using a Co-doped ZnO sensing element and sensitivity of
74% with the response and recovery times of 3 and 110 s,
respectively was reported [122]. Doping of fluorine with
ZnO improved the acetaldehyde sensing characteristics.
Fluorine doping concentrations in terms of 2 wt% was var-
ied up-to 10 wt% in ZnO to understand its physical prop-
erties. 4 wt% doped thin film showed selective response
towards 100 ppm of acetaldehyde with response-recovery
times of 18 and 25 s respectively [154].
Fig. 9  a In situ polymerization scheme on PET substrate, b fabrication of ammonia sensor on flexible PET substrate, and c reaction scheme of
ammonia with PANI (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [117] Copyright 2017 Elsevier)
4.3 Ethanol sensors
Ethanol is a colourless compound, used in food industries,
alcoholic beverages, and wine quality testing. The toxicity of
ethanol causes neuro-behavioral toxicity and depression in
the central nervous system once the human permissible con-
centration limit is exceeded [155–157]. According to OSHA,
the permissible human limit for ethanol gas is 1000 ppm
for 8 h. Therefore, the real-time detection of ethanol gas in
ambient environment is necessary. Sensors developed using
ZnO, ­TiO2, ­V2O5, and ­SnO2, have been reported for ethanol
detection [158].
Depending on the metal oxide surface, the functional
group of ethanol dissociates into a water molecule. Further,
this water vapour undergoes dehydration and dehydrogena-
tion process and leads to the evolution of carbon dioxide
and water molecules. The desorption rate of ethanol can be
determined by using the partial pressure of the ambient oxy-
gen molecule. The reaction at metal oxide surface becomes
predominant than the reaction with atmospheric oxygen. The
possible reaction scheme of ethanol is expressed in the fol-
lowing Eqs. (4–7) [159–162]
C2 H5 OH → C2 H4 + H2 O (4)
C2 H4 → 3O−2 + 2CO2 + 2H2 O + 3e− (5)
2C2 H5 OH → 2CH3 CHO + H2 (6)
2CH3 CHO + 5O−2 → 4CO2 + 4H2 O + 5e− (7)
Investigations on core–shell nanoparticles in gas sensing
applications have been popular in recent times. As such,
­ iO2 nanostructures have been reported for
silver modified T
room temperature ethanol sensor. The schematic ethanol
sensing mechanism of core–shell nanoparticles (silver @
­TiO2) is shown in Fig. 11. The lowest detection limit was
13

15836
Fig. 10  Scheme of acetaldehyde sensing mechanism using ZnO nanoplatelets (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [59] Copyright 2014 Else-
vier)
Fig. 11  Scheme of ethanol sensing mechanism of core shell Ag@
TiO2 (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [127] Copyright 2014
Elsevier)
found to be less than 5 ppm. Ag @ T
­ iO2 showed better selec-
tivity towards ethanol with 0.15 ppm [127].
Jang et al. reported the use of Ag @ ­SnO2 core–shell
nanoarchitectures for room temperature ethanol sensor. The
maximum response of 2.24 was observed with the response
and recovery times 34 and 68 s, respectively [128]. In addi-
tion, the silicon nanopillar array has been reported for
ethanol sensing based on the capacitive nature of sensing
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
elements. However, the lowest detection limit was found to
be 50 ppm [129]. Metal oxides doped with transition metal
elements for ethanol sensing characteristics have also been
investigated. Fe-doped ­TiO2 provides substantial evidence
that it can be a suitable agent for the detection of ethanol
at low temperatures [163]. Our group has reported several
room temperature ethanol sensors using ZnO nanostructures.
In particular, ZnO nanowires showed a significant response
of 78 towards 100 ppm ethanol at room temperature with the
response and recovery times of 9 and 12 s respectively [164].
4.4 Nitrogen dioxide sensors
Nitrogen dioxide ­(NO2) is an oxidizing reddish-brown toxic
gas, which produces an irritating odour [100, 102]. Gener-
ally, ­NO2 is produced from fossil fuel combustion, and it
affects the human respiratory tract [110]. ­NO2 is also pri-
marily responsible for the production of acid rain, green-
house effect, and depletion of the ozone layer [102, 110].
The atmospheric ­NO2 concentration range is 0.01 ppm, and
if the value exceeds 0.65 ppm, the major health issues will
be occurred [102]. Therefore, nitrogen oxide gas should be
monitored and detected in real-time environment.
Several attempts have been made to detect ­NO2 using
various metal oxide semiconducting sensors ­(WO3, ZnO,
­SnO2, and ­Cu2O) [99]. Among them, W ­ O3 and S­ nO2 are
the promising metal oxide candidates for N ­ O2 detection
[99, 102]. However, the operating temperature constraints
lead to poor nitrogen dioxide selectivity. In general, sen-
sors operated at higher operating temperatures for a pro-
longed period leads to sensor drifts and partial selectivity
characteristics towards different gases [165]. Under these
conditions, sensors are quite unstable due to elongated grain
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15837

growth and increased grain boundary resistances. Zhang
et al. [102] have reported the room temperature detection of
­NO2 through the cactus-like nanowires morphology of both
silicon and tungsten oxide (Fig. 12). The highly crystalline
1D nanowire morphology of tungsten oxide has significantly
improved, the specific surface area and therefore shown a
highly selective response to ­NO2 compared to other gases.
Due to the increased surface area, high electron conduc-
tivity and mobility, graphene, graphene oxide, and reduced
graphene oxide have been used to modify the metal oxide
surface to improve its sensing properties. Pengwang et al.
[103] have reported the room temperature ­NO2 gas sensor
using hydrothermally grown hierarchical flower-like mor-
phology of In(OH)3 modified with reduced graphene oxide.
Also, the morphologically induced nitrogen dioxide sens-
ing behavior was reported with a sensing response of 55%
towards 1 ppm [103].
In general, the defect profiles of p-type rGO regulates
the charge transfer while n-type In(OH)3 possess free elec-
trons as charge carriers. The flower-like In(OH)3 modified

Fig. 12  SEM images of W­ O3
nanowires on silicon nanowires
a growth temperature of 600 °C,
b 650 °C, c 700 °C, d plane
view, and e cross-sectional
image of 650 °C nanowires
(Reproduced with permission
from Ref. [102] Copyright 2016
Elsevier)

13

15838
graphene sheets are shown in Fig. 13. Upon rGO modifi-
cation with In(OH)3, the formation of particulate p–n het-
erostructure takes place between flower-like In(OH)3 and
rGO nanosheets. The enhancement in the sensing response
is highly attributed to the p–n heterojunction developed at
the interface between the flower-shaped In(OH)3 and gra-
phene sheets. When the heterostructure was exposed to N ­ O2
ambience, electrophilic substitution facilitates the effective
charge transfer between rGO and In(OH)3. The discontinu-
ity in the bands of rGO and In(OH)3 results in band bending
with reference to the gas solid interactions [103]. As such,
the adsorption and desorption of N ­ O2 molecules decide the
switching characteristics and swift transient profiles. Though
the sensor was reported with fast response, partial recovery
was observed. Inorder to make the sensor to recover to the
initial baseline resistance, water vapour was injected into the
sensing environment for 60 s [103]. Displacement of polar
water molecules to desorb the chemisorbed ­NO2 molecules
from the sensor surface is also one of the strategies to get
full recovery cycle [103].
Another ­NO2 sensing characteristics based on morphol-
ogy was reported by Wu et al. [104]. They have investigated
the ­NO2 sensing properties of porous I­ n2TiO5-rutile com-
posites nanotubes. Again, the 1D “In2TiO5-rutile compos-
ite nanotubes (IRCNs) [86] ” arrangements enhanced the
surface conductivity and oxygen vacancies. The effect of
rutile phase ­(In2TiO5 composite nanotubes) on the sensing
properties of nitrogen dioxide such as response, selectivity,
and stability were also investigated [104]. Highly selective
Fig. 13  Schematic representation of the preparation of hierarchical
flower-like In(OH)3 on graphene sheets (Reproduced with permission
from Ref. [103] Copyright 2015 Elsevier)
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
room temperature N ­ O2 detection has also been reported
for ­VO2 nanorods prepared using chemical vapour depo-
sition technique at different deposition temperatures [99].
In addition, N­ O2 sensing characteristics were performed at
different operating temperatures from room temperature to
100 °C. Even a very minimum concentration of N ­ O2 within
the range of 1–5 ppm can be detected using ­VO2 due to its
phase transition properties and the homogeneity effect of the
nanostructured material [99].
Better sensing characteristics can be achieved with a
lower detection limit through carbon nanotubes and metal
oxide-CNT composites. In this context, flexible sensors
based on pure MWCNTs and MWCNTs-WO3 nanocompos-
ites have been investigated for 108 cycles with different tar-
get gas at various bending and relaxing angles (up to 90 °C).
Pure MWCNTs showed less response due to the lack of p–n
junction and high binding energy between carbon atoms and
targeted gas [100]. On the other hand, the composite sen-
sor showed a lower detection limit of 0.1–5 ppm due to the
heterojunction between ­WO3 and CNT.
MWCNTs modified S ­ nO2-rGO hybrids are reported for
­NO2 detection at room temperature. The enhanced sensing
response was attributed to the p–n junction formed between
­SnO2 and rGO, the increased surface area, and the high elec-
tron transfer rate offered by CNTs. CNT modified ­SnO2-rGO
hybrids showed a better response compared to pure rGO and
­SnO2-rGO at room temperature [105].
4.5 Ozone sensors
Ozone ­(O3) is a strong oxidizing agent and is very useful in
both positive and negative ways. In many industries, ozone
is used to treat water and gas purification and is also used
to inactivate the microbial content of foodstuffs including
bacteria, fungi, and viruses. Ozone exhalation at higher con-
centrations leads to headache, irritation in the respiratory
system, and inflammation in the respiratory tract. Monitor-
ing of ozone concentration in the real-time ambient environ-
ment is therefore, essential. In this scenario, binary metal
oxide combinations have been investigated for the detection
of ozone at room temperature. These includes ZnO–SnO2,
core–shell Au@TiO2, Pt/TiO2–SnO2 [111, 112, 115]. Sur-
factant modified nanostructures have been developed for the
detection of ozone.
Recently, Mohamed et al. [113] have investigated the detec-
tion of ozone at room temperature using triton as a surfactant
on ­SnO2 thin film. The triton modified S­ nO2 nanorods mor-
phology showed better sensing characteristics towards ozone
with the response and recovery times of 15 s and 12 min. The
role of various nanostructured morphologies on the sensing
responses of ozone sensors at room temperature was reported
and highlighted in Table 1 [111–116]. However, the hetero-
junction surface of metal oxide must be more active to initiate
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15839
the reaction. Therefore, most sensors based on heterojunction
require light or thermal activation. Hence, several investiga-
tions have been carried out on the light-assisted ozone sensing.
Silva et al. [111] reported the detection of ozone at room tem-
perature using mixed oxide of ZnO–SnO2 material with UV
light environment. The heterojunction played a significant role
in improving the sensing performance. The heterostructured
interface showed a highly selective response towards ozone
from different target gases like ammonia, nitrogen dioxide,
carbon monoxide, and ozone. The possible interaction of light-
assisted behaviour of ozone with the ZnO–SnO2 heterojunc-
tion results in changes in resistance. When the sensing element
is exposed to the atmosphere, the width of the space charge
region is increased by the chemisorbed oxygen species. Upon
exposure to O ­ 3, due to its interaction with the sensing surface,
the resulting photo-generated electrons enhanced the surface
conductivity, in-turn helps to measure O ­ 3 concentration by the
given mechanism (Eqs. 8, 9),
h+ (h𝜐) + O−2(ads) → O2(des) (h𝜐)
O3(g) + e− (h𝜐) → 1∕2O2(des) (h𝜐) + O−2(ads) (h𝜐)
Dominik Klaus et al. [115] also studied the ozone sens-
ing properties of nanoporous ­In2O3 material at room tem-
perature using light assistance, exhibiting a lower detec-
tion limit of 0.05 ppm. The particle size-dependent ozone
Fig. 14  Particle size-dependent ozone sensing characteristics of I­n2O3 under UV light assistance (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [115]
Copyright 2015 Elsevier)
sensing behaviour was also investigated with light assistance
(Fig. 14). The role of the depletion region and the particle
size-dependent nature on sensing characteristics is shown
in Fig. 15. Also, the mesoporous morphologies of smaller
and larger nanoparticles are shown in Fig. 16. This shows
that not only the light-activated surface enhances the sensing
response but also the microstructural property of the sensing
element has a strong effect on it.
Au@TiO 2 [166] core–shell spherical nanoparticles
showed a highly selective detection of ozone at room tem-
perature with fast response and recovery times of 2 and 5 s
respectively. In addition, the detection limit of ozone was
found to be 0.5 ppm with high stability. Figure 17 shows
the possible interaction between core–shell nanoparticles
and ozone gas. Au core transfers more electrons during the
oxygen sorption process, which enhances the charge transfer
rate.
Kortidis et al. [114] reported ozone detection at room
temperature using highly porous ZnO thin films prepared
(8) using aerosol spray pyrolysis technique. The microstructural
properties of the sensing element including grain size, were
(9) studied. Porous microstructural grains enhanced the detec-
tion of ozone at room temperature with a minimum detection
limit of 0.016 ppm.
13

15840 Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847

Fig. 15  Mechanism explaining the sensing behaviour of ozone at room temperature (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [115] Copyright
2015 Elsevier)

Fig. 16  SEM images of I­n2O3, a and c large particles and, b and d smaller particles (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [115] Copyright
2015 Elsevier)

4.6 Aromatic VOCs sensors
Organic compounds have recently been identified as sources
of serious indoor health hazards and environmental pollut-
ants [167]. In this scenario, xylene, benzene, and toluene
must be detected at room temperature to safeguard the
indoor air quality [168]. Flower-like morphology of ­V2O5
has been reported for the room temperature xylene sens-
ing characteristics [123]. Polymer modified ­TiO2 thin films
were developed to detect benzene, ethanol, and methanol at
room temperatures [169]. Poly vinylidene fluoride (PVDF)
has intercalated with ­TiO2 thin film further enhanced the
sensing characteristics of VOCs at room temperature. How-
ever, the lowest detection limit has no significant value since
150 ppm [126]. Investigations on multi-walled carbon nano-
tubes decorated with metal nanoparticles like nickel, gold,
palladium, and ruthenium have become potential support
for benzene vapour recognition with better sensitivity and
selectivity [170]. It was found that the lowest detection limit
for benzene was 0.05 ppm [170]. ­TiO2 thin films dispersed
with PVF have been studied for the detection of benzene.
However, the lowest detection limit was reported as 10 ppm

13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15841

as follows: (i) The incident photon energy results in the genera-

Fig. 17  Schematic representation of ozone sensing mechanism of
Au@TiO2 sensing element (Reproduced with permission from Ref.
[166] Copyright 2015 Elsevier)
[168]. Heterojunctions with organic and inorganic composite
materials to detect trace concentrations of aromatic VOCs
have also been investigated. In this context, Murugan et al.
have prepared p-n heterojunction using n-type tin oxide and
p-type polyaniline for room temperature detection of ben-
zene vapour.
5 Overview of light activated gas sensors
Optically activating the sensing element surface with UV
light irradiation provides the pathway for enhancing the sens-
ing response. Also, optical energy provides an alternative to
thermal energy but it leads to additional power consumption
in sensor design aspects. Many works have been reported
for UV light-activated sensing characteristics. The general
mechanism of UV light-activated sensing characteristics are
tion of electron–hole pairs in the material; (ii) the generated
electron–hole pairs are getting separated as photo-activated
electrons and photo-activated holes; (iii) surface neutralization
usually prevents the immediate recombination of electrons and
hole pairs; (iv) the photo-activated electrons are transported
to the conduction band of the sensing element and thereby
increasing the carrier concentration; (v) due to the increased
number electrons, the chemisorption of oxygen process gets
enhanced as a result of increased oxygen reaction sites; (vi) in
target analyte/gas environment, due to the enhanced gas–solid
interaction, the response gets improved. Usually, the UV light
assisted sensing characteristics have been vastly investigated
in the iso-type/non-isotype heterostructures. In this section, an
overview of room temperature operated, light-activated sen-
sors reported in the literature is highlighted (Table 2).
Peng et al. have reported the photo-activated formaldehyde
sensor using hydrothermally synthesized ZnO nanorods. The
sensing response was observed to be 11.5 towards 110 ppm
of HCHO [171]. Under the UV light irradiation, the HCHO
response was observed to be increased drastically, and the
same was attributed to the enhanced number of photo-excited
electron–hole pairs. Light-activated ZnO/CdS isotype hetero-
structure was also reported for selective detection of HCHO
with maximum sensing response of 264. The minimum detec-
tion limit of the sensor was observed to be 10 ppm [172]. The
formaldehyde interaction scheme is represented through the
Eqs. (10–12).
O2(atmosphere) + e−(sensing element surface) → O−2(sensing element surface)
(10)
hv
HCHO + h+ →(HCHO)∗ (11)
hv
(HCHO)∗ + 2O−2 → CO2 ↑ +H2 O ↑ +4e− (12)

Table 2  Overview of room temperature light-activated gas sensors reported in the literature

S. No Materials Target gas Light source Response Limit of detection References
(ppm)

1. ZnO nanorods HCHO UV light 11.5 1.8 [171]

2. ZnO/CdS heterostructure HCHO White light 264 10 [172]
3. CdS nanoparticle/ZnO heterostructure HCHO Visible light 10.2 10 [173]
4. ZnO nanowire C2H5OH UV light 85 100 [174]
5. SnO2 nanowire NO2 UV light 85 0.1 [175]
6. ZnO/SnO2 heterostructure NO2 UV light 1266 0.2 [176]
7. NiO/TiO2 heterostructure NH3 UV light 140 10 [177]
8. ZnO microwires NO2 UV light 411 10 [178]
9. ZnO nanospheres H2O2 White light 52.6 10 [179]

13

15842
In ambient atmosphere, chemisorption of oxygen takes
place by consuming electrons from the conduction band of
ZnO as represented in Eqs. (10). Under the light ambient,
generation and separation of photo-excited electron–hole
pairs occur predominantly on the CdS surface due to the
light-harvesting nature of CdS. As such, the photo-activated
holes react with the formaldehyde gas and gets excited as
photo-activated formaldehyde gas [172]. The C=O bond
breakage in HCHO facilitates the charge transport to the
conduction band of ZnO. The band diagram representing the
HCHO scheme with ZnO/CdS is shown in Fig. 18. Isolation
of ZnO and CdS bands results in the charge transport from
CdS to ZnO. Fermi-level matching between CdS and ZnO
leads to band bending behaviour because of the disconti-
nuities in the bands. The accumulation of carriers in ZnO
and depletion of carriers in CdS has occurred [172]. Under
formaldehyde interaction, due to enhanced charge carri-
ers, the potential barrier height and depletion region width
have reduced. Under the recovery cycle, the desorption of
Fig. 18  Band model of HCHO detection using ZnO/CdO heterostructure a isolated bands, b oxygen chemisorption process, c light assistance,
and d under HCHO ambient (Reproduced with permission from Ref. [172] Copyright 2018 Elsevier)
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
interacted molecules results in attaining the initial baseline
[172].
Prades et al. [175] prepared S
­ nO2 nanowires to determine
the equivalency between thermally activated and UV—illu-
minated sensor responses. Comparison between the ­NO2
responses of the sensor under photo-activation and thermal
activation was reported. Better N ­ O2 sensing response was
observed for the sensor treated with UV light illumination.
The dynamic balance between adsorption and desorption of
oxygen and N ­ O2 molecules were reported for the enhanced
­NO2 sensing response under light assistance. Tuning of
adsorption and desorption processes using light assistance
is the new insight stating the effect of surface charges.
Wang et al. [174] prepared ZnO nanowire array for room
temperature ethanol sensing under UV light illumination and
studied the effect of piezoelectric response. The piezoelec-
tric response of the ZnO nanowire array towards ethanol
gas was increased to 85%. This significant response of ZnO
nanowire array was mainly attributed to the UV-induced
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15843
chemisorption and increased carrier density by ethanol mol-
ecules. Electron–hole pairs generated in the ZnO nanowire
increase the carrier concentration in the conduction band.
The holes present in the valence band get migrated towards
ZnO nanowire surface and reacted with chemisorbed oxygen
species. Similarly, photo-generated electrons combine with
atmospheric air and produce more oxygen ions. The process
can be explained through the Eqs. 13–15,
h𝜐 → h+ + e−
h+ + O−2(ad) → O2(g)
O2 + e− (h𝜐) → O−2 (h𝜐) (15)
­ O2 sensing character-
Lu et al. [176] have reported the N
istics of ZnO/SnO2 heterostructure under UV light illumina-
tion. Poor sensing response in the dark was restricted by the
rate of adsorbed hydroxyl ions, whereas light illumination
limited the rate of adsorbed hydroxyl ions and resulted in
the enhanced sensing characteristics at room temperature.
6 Challenges and remedies
In this section, the challenges faced when the gas sensors are
operated at room temperature have been highlighted. Also,
strategies to overcome the limitations have been mentioned.
1. Influence of humidity and surrounding atmosphere: The
gas sensing properties are strongly influenced by their
instantaneous environment and the nature of interact-
ing gases (both oxidizing and reducing) [180, 181]. The
most critical parameter, affecting the sensing character-
istics at the ambient atmosphere is the relative humidity
(RH%). The presence of high relative humidity in the
atmosphere results in poor sensing response and to mini-
mize its effects, sensing measurements should be car-
ried out in a dry air atmosphere [182]. This can improve
the oxygen adsorption sites and enhance the sensing
response [183, 184]. In general, the response at lower
humidity levels is better than higher RH levels. This
trend is attributed to the well-known mechanisms called
hopping charge transport and Grotthuss physisorption
mechanisms at lower and higher RH, respectively [59,
65–67].
2. Properties of target gas: The properties of the target gas
molecules during their interaction with the gas sens-
ing elements have their significance. The key aspects
for improving the selectivity and sensitivity could be
achieved by matching the bond energies of target gases
with the surface energies of sensing elements [83–88].
Bond energies can vary significantly with operating
temperature, and hence the gas molecules take preferred
orientations and adsorb the surface accordingly. Thus,
the use of external activation energy through optical
interaction supports the gas molecules to take prefer-
ential orientations and other properties, even at room
temperature.
3. Transformation from n-type to p-type conductivity: The
operating temperature also modulates the semiconduct-
ing property by affecting the charge carriers. At elevated
(13) temperatures, nanostructured ceria nanoparticles have
better ethanol selectivity than trimethylamine due to the
(14) transformation of n-type to p-type [185]. However, the
influence of natural phase transformation in room tem-
perature is low as it requires minimal thermal energy to
modulate [185].
4. Charge transport during solid–gas interaction: The
active transport of charge carriers from gas molecules
to sensing elements determines the response, selectivity,
and other figure of merits. This charge transfer process
depends on the oxygen adsorption sites available on the
surface, and the same decides the density of carriers on
the surface [186]. Sensing elements with more native
defects should be preferred for a better sensing response
at low temperatures as it relates to oxygen adsorption
sites.
5. Role of surface morphology and microstructures: The
nanostructured morphology plays an essential role in
tuning the gas sensing behaviour because of their quan-
tum confinement characteristics. This leads to the tun-
able density of states in-turn transport properties. Also,
the nanostructures provide an enhanced surface to vol-
ume ratio, which offers more adsorption sites for oxygen
and hence the gas–solid interaction, which helps us to
enhance the selectivity as well as response characteris-
tics.
6. The microstructural parameters such as (i) crystal-
lite size & crystallinity of exposed crystal planes, (ii)
microstrain, and (iii) defect profiles have a significant
influence on the sensing response, response-recovery
rate, and rate of adsorption and desorption processes
[51, 64, 187, 188]. Crystal with smaller size possesses
enhanced response due to the increased inner grain inter-
action and transport characteristics during the receptor
and transduction function [186]. Majumdar et al. [187]
have reported the influence of crystallite size of S ­ nO2
nanostructure on the n-butane sensing response. The
sensing response was observed to be linearly decreased
with increased crystallite size, and this behaviour is
attributed to the surface area and surface to volume ratio
of the sensing element [34]. Smaller nanocrystallites
offer enhanced surface area and surface to volume ratio
and improved surface catalytic behaviour [51]. In the
grain regime, the response can be greatly enhanced by
13

15844
reducing the grain size and is one of the most important
factors in metal oxides since it controls all the operat-
ing characteristics of the gas sensor [91, 92, 189]. As
the reduced grain size results in enhanced inner grain
interaction, we could even observe 4 or 3 order change
in surface resistance [92, 190].
One of the most important microstructural properties
is the dominant crystal plane or plane orientation. Crystal
planes have their surface energy levels, which make the
gas molecules to interact with the surface of the sensing
element [190]. Enhanced crystallinity of exposed crystal
plane results in lower sensing response as the contribution
of polar to the non-polar plane have a significant effect. In
this line, we have recently investigated the effect of exposed
crystal plane of ZnO nanowires on the selective detection
of ammonia at room temperature [64, 188]. As the polar
plane (002) orientation was observed as a preferential plane
in the nanowire, the intensity ratio of I (002)/I (100) was in
large fraction. Thus, enhanced crystallinity and the role of
exposed crystal planes are the key factors in achieving the
desired sensing response [64]. Microstrain profile of the
nanostructure plays a major role in tuning sensing response
as they indirectly induce the defect centers. For the p-type
semiconducting material, the acceptor defect levels are
more significant and for n-type, the donor defect levels are
predominant. Also, the possible oxygen-deficient natured
metal oxide nanostructures have a pronounced effect in
sensing characteristics [191].
7. Influence of preparation techniques and selection of
dopants: In order to achieve better selectivity and sen-
sitivity at lower operating temperatures, the preparation
conditions [192] of the sensing elements must be opti-
mized [193, 194]. The microstructural properties of the
sensing elements including crystal orientation, crystal
plane direction, grains features, can be altered using dif-
ferent preparation techniques [195]. The proper selec-
tion of dopants and their equivalent concentrations have
become a potential methodology to modify the sensing
characteristics by lowering the surface energy for the
chemisorption of gas molecules [31, 32, 196–198]. The
choice of dopants can be anionic or cationic, depending
on the nature of the host sensing elements [199]. As
dopants help to control grain-size and grain boundary
resistance, doping is one of the most preferred sources
for enhancing the figure of merits of gas sensors [196,
200–202]. The selection of dopants directly related to
the various parameters like ionic radii of the dopants,
type of host metal oxide material, the electron affinity of
the dopants and possible hybridization of orbitals [201].
The active incorporation of dopants in the host material
improves the carrier concentration, which further alters
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
the density of states and bandgap energy. This results in
enhanced surface catalytic properties, which promote
more oxygen adsorption sites [196, 203, 204].
7 Concluding remarks
This review has highlighted the challenges in the fabrication
of room temperature gas sensors, in particular, the influ-
ence of materials selection, surface morphology, transient
response, electrical properties of sensing elements, charge
transport phenomena during gas–solid interaction, humid-
ity, and properties of target gases. The ways and means
of addressing these challenges have been reviewed, and
particularly the role of controlled growth of grains, grain
boundaries, and nanostructured morphologies has been nar-
rated. Sensing properties related to nanostructures tailored
not only by the modification of preparation techniques but
also by the incorporation of dopants have been discussed. In
order to analyze the effects of the identified parameters on
the sensing characteristics at room temperature, the figure
of merits of sensors fabricated using metal oxide materi-
als like ZnO, S­ nO2, ­TiO2, etc. with dopants and functional
materials have been consolidated and reported. Remedies
such as nanostructured materials with a tunable density of
states, sensitization of materials surfaces with functional
materials, modulation of porosity, improvement of catalytic
activity by dopants, sensing elements with different forms
like core–shell, heterostructures, thin films, etc., have also
been discussed.
Acknowledgements  Authors wish to express their sincere thanks to
the Department of Science & Technology, New Delhi, India for their
financial support SR/FST/ET-II/2018/221 and ECR/2016/001805. Two
authors, Parthasarathy Srinivasan, and Madeshwari Ezhilan, wish to
expresses their sincere thanks to Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research (HRDG-09/1095/0016/2016-EMR-I) and (09/1095(0044)/19-
EMR-I), New Delhi, India for the financial support. They also acknowl-
edge SASTRA Deemed University, Thanjavur for extending infrastruc-
ture support to carry out this work.
References
1. E. Comini, G. Faglia, G. Sberveglieri, Electrical-Based Gas
Sensing (Springer, Boston, 2009)
2. Y.-F. Sun, S.-B. Liu, F.-L. Meng, J.-Y. Liu, Z. Jin, L.-T. Kong,
J.-H. Liu, Sensors (Basel). 12, 2610 (2012)
3. G. Korotcenkov, Mater. Sci. Eng. B 139, 1 (2007)
4. S. Sharma, M. Madou, Philos. Trans. A. 370, 2448 (2012)
5. X.-J. Huang, Y.-K. Choi, Sensors Actuators B 122, 659 (2007)
6. K.D. Schierbaum, Sensors Actuators B 24, 239 (1995)
7. J. Huang, Q. Wan, Sensors 9, 9903 (2009)
8. A. Kolodziejczak-Radzimska, T. Jesionowski, Materials (Basel).
7, 2833 (2014)
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15845
9. J.X. Wang, X.W. Sun, Y. Yang, H. Huang, Y.C. Lee, O.K. Tan,
L. Vayssieres, Nanotechnology 17, 4995 (2006)
10. F. Wang, H. Li, Z. Yuan, Y. Sun, F. Chang, H. Deng, L. Xie, H.
Li, RSC Adv. 6, 79343 (2016)
11. K.R. Nemade, S.A. Waghuley, Int. J. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2, 63
(2014)
12. R.M. Agrawal, S.D. Charpe, F.C. Raghuwanshi, G.T. Lamdhade,
Int. J. Appl. Innov. Eng. Manag. 4, 141 (2015)
13. R. Vijayalakshmi, V. Rajendran, Sch. Res. Libr. 4, 1183 (2012)
14. T. Kalaivani, P. AnilKumar, J. Mater. Sci. 29, 9920 (2018)
15. X.-T. Yin, W.-D. Zhou, J. Li, P. Lv, Q. Wang, D. Wang, F. Wu, D.
Dastan, H. Garmestani, Z. Shi, Ş. Ţălu, J. Mater. Sci. 30, 14687
(2019)
16. A. Kanneganti, M. Talasila, J. Eng. Res. Appl. 4, 116 (2014)
17. A.K. Prasad, P.I. Gouma, J. Mater. Sci. 38, 4347 (2003)
18. A.N. Naje, A.S. Norry, A.M. Suhail, Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng.
Technol. 2, 7068 (2013)
19. J. Livage, Materials (Basel). 3, 4175 (2010)
20. L. Liao, H.X. Mai, Q. Yuan, H.B. Lu, J.C. Li, C. Liu, C.H. Yan,
Z.X. Shen, T. Yu, J. Phys. Chem. C 112, 9061 (2008)
21. T. Chen, Q.J. Liu, Z.L. Zhou, Y.D. Wang, Nanotechnology 19,
95506 (2008)
22. S.H. Lee, R. Deshpande, P.A. Parilla, K.M. Jones, B. To, A.H.
Mahan, A.C. Dillon, Adv. Mater. 18, 763 (2006)
23. H. Najafi-Ashtiani, J. Mater. Sci. 30, 12224 (2019)
24. Z. Liu, T. Yamazaki, Y. Shen, T. Kikuta, N. Nakatani, Y. Li,
Sens. Actuators B 129, 666 (2008)
25. J.-Y. Park, J.-K. Heo, Y.-C. Kang, Bull. Korean Chem. Soc. 31,
397 (2010)
26. C. Cantalini, M. Post, D. Buso, M. Guglielmi, A. Martucci, Sens.
Actuators B 108, 184 (2005)
27. V.V. Mali, S.T. Navale, M.A. Chougule, G.D. Khuspe, P.R.
Godse, S.A. Pawar, V.B. Patil, AIP Conf. Proc. 1591, 631 (2014)
28. A. Mirzaei, B. Hashemi, K. Janghorban, J. Mater. Sci. 27, 3109
(2016)
29. S. Vetter, S. Haffer, T. Wagner, M. Tiemann, Sens. Actuators B
206, 133 (2015)
30. I. Kelpšaite, J. Baltrušaitis, E. Valatka, Medziagotyra 17, 236
(2011)
31. G. Sakai, G. Sakai, K. Shimanoe, K. Shimanoe, Catal. Surv. Asia
7, 63 (2003)
32. N. Yamazoe, Y. Kurokawa, T. Seiyama, Sens. Actuators 4, 283
(1983)
33. V.E. Bochenkov, G.B. Sergeev, Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 116,
245 (2005)
34. M.M. Arafat, B. Dinan, S.A. Akbar, A.S.M.A. Haseeb, Sensors
12, 7207 (2012)
35. R. Boppella, P. Manjula, S. Arunkumar, S.V. Manorama, Chem.
Sens. 4, 1 (2014)
36. J. Wang, J.-W. Luo, L. Zhang, A. Zunger, Nano Lett. 15, 88
(2015)
37. K.S. Kim, Y.J. Park, Nanoscale Res. Lett. 7, 47 (2012)
38. X.C. Song, X. Wang, Y.F. Zheng, R. Ma, H.Y. Yin, J. Nanopart.
Res. 13, 1319 (2011)
39. S.G. Victoria, A.M.E. Raj, C. Ravidhas, Mater. Chem. Phys. 162,
852 (2015)
40. W. Shi, N. Chopra, J. Nanopart. Res. 13, 851 (2011)
41. J.Y. Lao, J.G. Wen, Z.F. Ren, Nano Lett. 2, 1287 (2002)
42. D. Sporn, P. Löbmann, U. Guntow, W. Glaubitt, in Chemical
Physics of Thin Film Deposition Processes for Micro- and-
Nano-Technologies, ed. By Y. Pauleau. NAII, vol 55 (Springer,
Dordrecht, 2002), pp. 69–89
43. M. Stan, A. Popa, D. Toloman, T.-D. Silipas, D.C. Vodnar, Acta
Metall. Sin. English Lett. 29, 228 (2016)
44. A. Ali, Z. Wazir, M. Tufail, Z.H. Ibupoto, M. Atif, Indian J. Phys.
89, 331 (2015)
45. A. Sripathi, D. Krishna, C. Tai, M. Sridhar, Mater. Chem. Phys.
125, 347 (2011)
46. L.T. Hoa, J.S. Chung, S.H. Hur, Sens. Actuators B 223, 76 (2016)
47. H.-U. Lee, K. Ahn, S.-J. Lee, J.-P. Kim, H.-G. Kim, S.-Y. Jeong,
C.-R. Cho, Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 193114 (2011)
48. K. Vijayalakshmi, A. Renitta, K. Karthick, Ceram. Int. 40, 6171
(2014)
49. B.G. Jeyaprakash, K. Kesavan, R.A. Kumar, S. Mohan, A. Ama-
larani, Bull. Mater. Sci. 34, 601 (2011)
50. V. Balouria, A. Kumar, S. Samanta, S. Bhattacharya, A. Singh,
A.K. Debnath, A. Mahajan, R.K. Bedi, D.K. Aswal, S.K. Gupta,
AIP Conf. Proc. 289, 289 (2012)
51. F. Fang, J. Kennedy, J. Futter, T. Hopf, A. Markwitz, E. Mani-
kandan, G. Henshaw, Nanotechnology 22, 335702 (2011)
52. F. Fang, J. Futter, A. Markwitz, J. Kennedy, Nanotechnology 20,
245502 (2009)
53. A.M. Amanulla, S.K.J. Shahina, R. Sundaram, C.M. Magdalane,
K. Kaviyarasu, D. Letsholathebe, S.B. Mohamed, J. Kennedy, M.
Maaza, J. Photochem. Photobiol. B 183, 233 (2018)
54. J. Kennedy, P.P. Murmu, J. Leveneur, A. Markwitz, J. Futter,
Appl. Surf. Sci. 367, 52 (2016)
55. K. Kaviyarasu, G.T. Mola, S.O. Oseni, K. Kanimozhi, C.M. Mag-
dalane, J. Kennedy, M. Maaza, J. Mater. Sci. 30, 147 (2019)
56. K. Wetchakun, T. Samerjai, N. Tamaekong, C. Liewhiran, C.
Siriwong, V. Kruefu, A. Wisitsoraat, A. Tuantranont, S. Phan-
ichphant, Sens. Actuators B 160, 580 (2011)
57. X. Liu, S. Cheng, H. Liu, S. Hu, D. Zhang, H. Ning, Sensors
(Basel). 12, 9635 (2012)
58. Z. Pang, J. Yu, D. Li, Q. Nie, J. Zhang, Q. Wei, J. Mater. Sci. 29,
3576 (2018)
59. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, Sens. Actuators B 198, 125 (2014)
60. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, Mater. Sci. Eng. B 191, 41 (2015)
61. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, Sens. Actuators B 183, 459 (2013)
62. A. Bouaoud, A. Rmili, F. Ouachtari, A. Louardi, T. Chtouki, B.
Elidrissi, H. Erguig, Mater. Chem. Phys. 137(3), 843 (2013)
63. A.P. Rambu, L. Ursu, N. Iftimie, V. Nica, M. Dobromir, F. Iac-
omi, Appl. Surf. Sci. 280, 598 (2013)
64. P. Srinivasan, J.B.B. Rayappan, Sens. Actuators B 277, 129
(2018)
65. N. Barsan, M. Schweizer-Berberich, W.G. Fresenius, J. Anal.
Chem. 365, 287 (1999)
66. N. Barsan, U. Weimar, J. Electroceram. 7, 143 (2001)
67. W.M. Sears, Sens. Actuators B 67, 161 (2000)
68. P. Nelli, G. Faglia, G. Sberveglieri, E. Cereda, G. Gabetta, A.
Dieguez, Thin Solid Films 371, 249 (2000)
69. A.C. Romain, J. Nicolas, Sens. Actuators B 146, 502 (2010)
70. G. Korotcenkov, B.K. Cho, Sens. Actuators B 156, 527 (2011)
71. E. Cordos, L. Ferenczi, S. Cadar, S. Costiug, G. Pitl, A. Aciu, A.
Ghita, IEEE Int. Conf. Autom. Qual. Test. Robot. 2, 208 (2006)
72. X. Liu, S. Cheng, H. Liu, S. Hu, D. Zhang, H. Ning, Sensors 12,
9635 (2012)
73. D. Sivalingam, B.G. Jeyaprakash, J.B.B. Rayappan, Cryst. Res.
Technol. 46, 685 (2011)
74. D. Sivalingam, J.B. Gopalakrishnan, U.M. Krishnan, S. Mada-
nagurusamy, J.B.B. Rayappan, Physica E 43, 1804 (2011)
75. D. Sivalingam, J.B. Gopalakrishnan, J.B.B. Rayappan, Mater.
Lett. 77, 117 (2012)
76. I. Rawal, RSC Adv. 5, 4135 (2015)
77. S. Lenaerts, J. Roggen, G. Maes, Spectrochim. Acta Part A 51,
883 (1995)
78. M. Dominguez-Pumar, L. Kowalski, R. Calavia, E. Llobet, Sens.
Actuators B 229, 1 (2016)
79. L. Kowalski, J. Pons-Nin, E. Navarrete, E. Llobet, M.
Domínguez-Pumar, Sensors 18, 654 (2018)
80. H. Li, W. Xie, B. Liu, C. Wang, Y. Wang, X. Duan, Q. Li, T.
Wang, Sens. Actuators B 242, 404 (2017)
13

15846
81. M.S. Wagh, G.H. Jain, D.R. Patil, S.A. Patil, L.A. Patil, Sens.
Actuators B 115, 128 (2006)
82. Z. Wen, L. Tian-mo, Physica B 405, 1345 (2010)
83. J. Wang, P. Yang, X. Wei, A.C.S. Appl, Mater. Interfaces 7, 3816
(2015)
84. H. Tai, Y. Jiang, G. Xie, J. Yu, X. Chen, Z. Ying, Sens. Actuators
B 129, 319 (2008)
85. A. Nancy Anna Anasthasiya, K. Roopa Kishore, P.K. Rai, B.G.
Jeyaprakash, Sens. Actuators B. 255, 1064 (2018)
86. A. Nancy Anna Anasthasiya, K. Roopa Kishore, P.K. Rai, B.G.
Jeyaprakash, Appl. Surf. Sci. 449, 244 (2018)
87. L. Schmidt-mende, J.L. Macmanus-driscoll, Mater. Today 10, 40
(2007)
88. C. Wang, X. Chu, M. Wu, Sens. Actuators B 113, 320 (2006)
89. M. Gardon, J.M. Guilemany, J. Mater. Sci. 24, 1410 (2013)
90. Y. Wang, B. Liu, S. Xiao, H. Li, L. Wang, D. Cai, D. Wang, Y.
Liu, Q. Li, T. Wang, J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 1317 (2015)
91. N. Yamazoe, Sens. Actuators B 5, 7 (1991)
92. P. Shankar, J. Bosco, B. Rayappan, Sci. Jet 4, 126 (2015)
93. G.F. Fine, L.M. Cavanagh, A. Afonja, R. Binions, Sensors 10,
5469 (2010)
94. X. Wang, S.S. Yee, W.P. Carey, Sens. Actuators B 25, 454 (1995)
95. G.K. Mani, J. Bosco, B. Rayappan, RSC Adv. 5, 54952 (2015)
96. S. Park, S. Kim, H. Kheel, C. Lee, Sens. Actuators B 222, 1193
(2015)
97. L.N. Balakrishnan, S. Gowrishankar, N. Gopalakrishnan, IEEE
Sens. J. 13, 2055 (2013)
98. V. Kobrinsky, E. Fradkin, V. Lumelsky, A. Rothschild, Y.
Komem, Y. Lifshitz, Sens. Actuators B 148, 379 (2010)
99. J. Liang, W. Li, J. Liu, M. Hu, J. Alloys Compd. 687, 845 (2016)
100. U. Yaqoob, D.-T. Phan, A.S.M.I. Uddin, G.-S. Chung, Sens.
Actuators B 221, 760 (2015)
101. L. Guan, S. Wang, W. Gu, J. Zhuang, H. Jin, W. Zhang, T. Zhang,
J. Wang, Sens. Actuators B 196, 321 (2014)
102. W. Zhang, M. Hu, X. Liu, Y. Wei, N. Li, Y. Qin, J. Alloys
Compd. 679, 391 (2016)
103. P. Wan, W. Yang, X. Wang, J. Hu, H. Zhang, Sens. Actuators B
214, 36 (2015)
104. H. Wu, L. Wang, J. Zhou, J. Gao, G. Zhang, S. Xu, Y. Xie, L. Li,
K. Shi, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 466, 72 (2016)
105. S. Liu, Z. Wang, Y. Zhang, C. Zhang, T. Zhang, Sens. Actuators
B 211, 318 (2015)
106. Z. Wang, Y. Zhang, S. Liu, T. Zhang, Sens. Actuators B 222, 893
(2016)
107. T. Siciliano, A. Genga, G. Micocci, M. Siciliano, M. Tepore, A.
Tepore, Sens. Actuators B 201, 138 (2014)
108. A.T. Mane, S.T. Navale, V.B. Patil, Org. Electron. 19, 15 (2015)
109. R. Leghrib, A. Felten, J.J. Pireaux, E. Llobet, Thin Solid Films
520, 966 (2011)
110. X. Jie, D. Zeng, J. Zhang, K. Xu, J. Wu, B. Zhu, C. Xie, Sens.
Actuators B 220, 201 (2015)
111. L.F. Da Silva, J.-C. M’peko, A.C. Catto, S. Bernardini, V.R. Mas-
telaro, K. Aguir, C. Ribeiro, E. Longo, Sens. Actuators B 240,
573 (2017)
112. Z. Zhu, J.L. Chang, R.J. Wu, Sens. Actuators B 214, 56 (2015)
113. M. Belaqziz, M. Amjoud, A. Gaddari, B. Rhouta, D. Mezzane,
Superlattices Microstruct. 71, 185 (2014)
114. I. Kortidis, K. Moschovis, F.A. Mahmoud, G. Kiriakidis, Thin
Solid Films 518, 1208 (2009)
115. D. Klaus, D. Klawinski, S. Amrehn, M. Tiemann, T. Wagner,
Sens. Actuators B 217, 181 (2015)
116. R.J. Wu, C.Y. Chen, M.H. Chen, Y.L. Sun, Sens. Actuators B
123, 1077 (2007)
117. L. Kumar, I. Rawal, A. Kaur, S. Annapoorni, Sens. Actuators B
240, 408 (2017)
13
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847
118. X. Li, X. Li, Z. Li, J. Wang, J. Zhang, Sens. Actuators B 240, 273
(2017)
119. U.V. Patil, N.S. Ramgir, N. Karmakar, A. Bhogale, A.K. Deb-
nath, D.K. Aswal, S.K. Gupta, D.C. Kothari, Appl. Surf. Sci.
339, 69 (2015)
120. X. Li, Y. Zhao, X. Wang, J. Wang, A.M. Gaskov, S.A. Akbar,
Sens. Actuators B 230, 330 (2016)
121. Q. Feng, X. Li, J. Wang, A.M. Gaskov, Sens. Actuators B 222,
864 (2016)
122. S. Shalini, D. Balamurugan, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 466, 352
(2016)
123. Y. Vijayakumar, G.K. Mani, M.V.R. Reddy, J.B.B. Rayappan,
Ceram. Int. 41, 2221 (2015)
124. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, Sens. Actuators B 223, 343 (2016)
125. L. Yanxiao, Z. Xiao-bo, H. Xiao-wei, S. Ji-yong, Z. Jie-wen, M.
Holmes, L. Hao, Biosens. Bioelectron. 67, 35 (2015)
126. M. Mabrook, P. Hawkins, Sens. Actuators B 75, 197 (2001)
127. Z. Zhu, C.T. Kao, R.J. Wu, Appl. Surf. Sci. 320, 348 (2014)
128. R.J. Wu, D.J. Lin, M.R. Yu, M.H. Chen, H.F. Lai, Sens. Actua-
tors B 178, 185 (2013)
129. X.J. Li, S.J. Chen, C.Y. Feng, Sens. Actuators B 123, 461 (2007)
130. A. Arena, N. Donato, G. Saitta, A. Bonavita, G. Rizzo, G. Neri,
Sens. Actuators B 145, 488 (2010)
131. S.A. Hakim, Y. Liu, Y. Lu, W. Chen, Mater. Sci. Semicond. Pro-
cess. 31, 630 (2015)
132. D. Zhu, Y. Fu, W. Zang, Y. Zhao, L. Xing, X. Xue, Mater. Lett.
166, 288 (2016)
133. S. Manivannan, A.M. Saranya, B. Renganathan, D. Sastikumar,
G. Gobi, K.C. Park, Sens. Actuators B 171–172, 634 (2012)
134. M. Seetha, P. Meena, D. Mangalaraj, Y. Masuda, K. Senthil,
Mater. Chem. Phys. 133, 47 (2012)
135. M. Li, L.J. Qiao, W.Y. Chu, A.A. Volinsky, Sens. Actuators B
158, 340 (2011)
136. D. Sebok, I. Dékány, Sens. Actuators B 206, 435 (2015)
137. Agency for toxic substances and disease (ASTDR) Registry, Pub-
lic Heal. Statement Ammon. CAS# 7664-, 1 (n.d.)
138. J.W. Erisman, M.A. Sutton, J. Galloway, Z. Klimont, W. Wini-
warter, Nat. Geosci. 1, 636 (2008)
139. C. Malins, A. Doyle, B.D. MacCraith, F. Kvasnik, M. Landl, P.
Simon, L. Kalvoda, R. Lukas, K. Pufler, I. Babusík, J. Environ.
Monit. 1, 417 (1999)
140. Y. Alarie, Environ. Health Perspect. 42, 9 (1981)
141. B. Timmer, W. Olthuis, A. Van Den Berg, Sens. Actuators B 107,
666 (2005)
142. S.G. Sazhin, E.I. Soborover, S.V. Tokarev, Russ. J. Nondestruct.
Test. 39, 791 (2003)
143. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, Appl. Surf. Sci. 311, 405–412
(2014)
144. G.K. Mani, J.B.B. Rayappan, J. Alloys Compd. 582, 414 (2014)
145. Z. Imran, K. Rasool, S.S. Batool, M. Ahmad, M.A. Rafiq, AIP
Adv. 5, 117214 (2015)
146. P. Shankar, J.B.B. Rayappan, RSC Adv. 5, 85363 (2015)
147. F. Akira, O. Tatsuki, Electron. Commun. Jpn. 96, 11 (2013)
148. W. Liu, Y. Liu, J. Do, J. Li, Appl. Surf. Sci. 390, 929 (2016)
149. M.C. da Cunha Veloso, V.M. da Silva, G.V. Santos, J.B. de
Andrade, J. Chromatogr. Sci. 39, 173 (2001)
150. D. Calestani, R. Mosca, M. Zanichelli, M. Villani, A. Zappettini,
J. Mater. Chem. 21, 15532 (2011)
151. A. Giberti, M.C. Carotta, B. Fabbri, S. Gherardi, V. Guidi, C.
Malagù, Sens. Actuators B 174, 402 (2012)
152. P. Rai, Y.-T. Yu, Sens. Actuators B 173, 58 (2012)
153. J. Xu, J. Han, Y. Zhang, Y. Sun, B. Xie, Sens. Actuators B 132,
334 (2008)
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Electronics (2019) 30:15825–15847 15847
154. E. Gunasekaran, M. Ezhilan, G.K. Mani, P. Shankar, A.J. Kulan-
daisamy, J.B.B. Rayappan, K.J. Babu, Semicond. Sci. Technol.
33, 95005 (2018)
155. A. Hamad, L. Li, Z. Liu, X. Li, Z. Tao, Appl. Phys. A. 119, 1387
(2015)
156. S. Parthasarathy, V. Nandhini, D. Prakalya, B.G. Jeyaprakash,
Int. J. ChemTech. Res. 7, 884 (2015)
157. L. Zhang, J. Zhao, H. Lu, L. Li, J. Zheng, H. Li, Z. Zhu, Sens.
Actuators B 161, 209 (2012)
158. D. Sivalingam, J.B.B. Rayappan, S. Gandhi, S. Madanagurusamy,
R.K. Sekar, U. Krishnan, Int. J. Nanosci. 10, 1161 (2011)
159. D. Chen, X. Hou, H. Wen, Y. Wang, H. Wang, X. Li, R. Zhang,
H. Lu, H. Xu, S. Guan, J. Sun, L. Gao, Nanotechnology 21,
035501 (2010)
160. F. Hellegouarch, F. Arefi-Khonsari, R. Planade, J. Amouroux,
Sens. Actuators B 73, 27 (2001)
161. R.S. Khadayate, R.B. Waghulde, M.G. Wankhede, J.V. Sali, P.P.
Patil, Bull. Mater. Sci. 30, 129 (2007)
162. C. Stella, N. Soundararajan, K. Ramachandran, J. Mater. Sci. 26,
4178 (2015)
163. K. Vijayalakshmi, S.D. Jereil, Ceram. Int. 41, 3220 (2015)
164. P. Shankar, J.B.B. Rayappan, A.C.S. Appl, Mater. Interfaces 9,
38135 (2017)
165. M. Fleischer, H. Meixner, Sens. Actuators B 52, 179 (1998)
166. Z. Zhu, J.L. Chang, R.J. Wu, Sens. Actuators B Chem. 214, 56
(2015)
167. K. Kanda, T. Maekawa, Sens. Actuators B 108, 97 (2005)
168. M. Mabrook, P. Hawkins, Sensors 2, 374 (2002)
169. S.G. Pawar, M.A. Chougule, S.L. Patil, B.T. Raut, P.R. Godse,
S. Sen, V.B. Patil, IEEE Sens. J. 11, 3417 (2011)
170. R. Leghrib, A. Felten, F. Demoisson, F. Reniers, J.J. Pireaux, E.
Llobet, Carbon N. Y. 48, 3477 (2010)
171. L. Peng, J. Zhai, D. Wang, Y. Zhang, P. Wang, Q. Zhao, T. Xie,
Sens. Actuators B 148, 66 (2010)
172. P. Srinivasan, B.G. Jeyaprakash, J. Alloys Compd. 768, 1016
(2018)
173. J. Zhai, D. Wang, L. Peng, Y. Lin, X. Li, T. Xie, Sens. Actuators
B 147, 234 (2010)
174. P. Wang, Y. Fu, B. Yu, Y. Zhao, L. Xing, X. Xue, J. Mater. Chem.
A 3, 3529 (2015)
175. J.D. Prades, R. Jimenez-Diaz, F. Hernandez-Ramirez, S. Barth,
A. Cirera, A. Romano-Rodriguez, S. Mathur, J.R. Morante, Sens.
Actuators B 140, 337 (2009)
176. G. Lu, J. Xu, J. Sun, Y. Yu, Y. Zhang, F. Liu, Sens. Actuators B
162, 82 (2012)
177. X. Li, N. Chen, S. Lin, J. Wang, J. Zhang, Sens. Actuators B 209,
729 (2015)
178. L. Meng, Q. Xu, Z. Sun, G. Li, S. Bai, Z. Wang, Y. Qin, Mater.
Lett. 212, 296 (2018)
179. S. Parthasarathy, V. Nandhini, B.G. Jeyaprakash, J. Colloid Inter-
face Sci. 482, 81 (2016)
View publication stats
180. F.M. Takata, G. Pattanaik, W. a. Soffa, P. T. a Sumodjo, and G.
Zangari, in Electrochemistry Communications, ed. by T. Seiyama
(Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2008), pp. 568–571
181. O. Wurzinger, G. Reinhardt, Sens. Actuators B 103, 104 (2004)
182. N.D. Hoa, S.Y. An, N.Q. Dung, N. Van Quy, D. Kim, Sens.
Actuators B 146, 239 (2010)
183. Z. Bai, C. Xie, M. Hu, S. Zhang, D. Zeng, Mater. Sci. Eng. B
149, 12 (2008)
184. D.H. Kim, J.Y. Yoon, H.C. Park, K.H. Kim, Sens. Actuators B
62, 61 (2000)
185. K.L.A. Kumar, S. Durgajanani, B.G. Jeyaprakash, J.B.B. Rayap-
pan, Sens. Actuators B 177, 19 (2013)
186. M.J.S. Spencer, Prog. Mater Sci. 57, 437 (2012)
187. S. Majumdar, Ceram. Int. 41, 14350 (2015)
188. G.R. Li, T. Hu, G.L. Pan, T.Y. Yan, X.P. Gao, H.Y. Zhu, J. Phys.
Chem. C 112, 11859 (2008)
189. C. Xu, J. Tamaki, N. Miura, N. Yamazoe, Sens. Actuators B 3,
147 (1991)
190. G. Korotcenkov, Mater. Sci. Eng. R 61, 1 (2008)
191. M. Kumar, V. Bhatt, A.C. Abhyankar, J. Kim, A. Kumar, S.H.
Patil, J.-H. Yun, Sci. Rep. 8, 8079 (2018)
192. A. Gurlo, M. Ivanovskaya, Sens. Actuators B 44, 327 (1997)
193. S. Kannan, L. Rieth, F. Solzbacher, Sens. Actuators B 149, 8
(2010)
194. X.D. Gao, X.M. Li, W.D. Yu, Appl. Surf. Sci. 229, 275 (2004)
195. P.V.R. Ramesh, B.K. Ramamurthi, J.V.E. Elangovan, 26, 4152
(2015)
196. F.D. Paraguay, M. Miki-Yoshida, J. Morales, J. Solis, W.L.
Estrada, Thin Solid Films 373, 137 (2000)
197. P. Tyagi, A. Sharma, M. Tomar, V. Gupta, Chem. Sens. 4, 18
(2014)
198. A. Sharma, M. Tomar, V. Gupta, J. Nanosci. Lett. 2, 27 (2014)
199. Z. Zhou, K. Kato, T. Komaki, M. Yoshino, H. Yukawa, M.
Morinaga, K. Morita, J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 24, 139 (2004)
200. A.N.G. Krishnan, G.K. Mani, P. Shankar, B. Vutukuri, J.B.B.
Rayappan, A. Nambi, G. Krishnan, G.K. Mani, P. Shankar, Sci.
Lett. 4, 79 (2015)
201. P. Nunes, E. Fortunato, P. Vilarinho, R. Martins, Int. J. Inorg.
Mater. 3, 1211 (2001)
202. X. Wang, M. Zhao, F. Liu, J. Jia, X. Li, L. Cao, Ceram. Int. 39,
2883 (2013)
203. T.-R. Ling, C.-M. Tsai, Sens. Actuators B 119, 497 (2006)
204. P.S. Patil, Mater. Chem. Phys. 59, 185 (1999)
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
13