Appl. Phys.
A
DOI 10.1007/s00339-015-9442-3
RAPID COMMUNICATION
Sensitivity enhancement of surface plasmon resonance sensor
based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid structure with TiO2–SiO2
composite layer
J. B. Maurya1 • Y. K. Prajapati1 • V. Singh2 • J. P. Saini3
Received: 1 May 2015 / Accepted: 18 August 2015
 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015
Abstract In this paper, surface plasmon resonance (SPR)
sensor based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid structure with
composite layer of TiO2–SiO2 is presented. The angular
interrogation method is used for the analysis of reflected
light from the sensor. For the calculation of the sensitivity,
first of all the thicknesses of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layers are
optimized for the monolayer graphene and MoS2. There-
after, at these optimum thicknesses the reflectance curves
are plotted for different sensor structure and comparison of
change in resonance angle is made among these structures.
It is observed that the sensitivity of the graphene–MoS2-
based sensor is enhanced by 9.24 % with respect conven-
tional SPR sensor. The sensitivity is further enhanced by
including TiO2–SiO2 composite layer between prism base
and metal layer and observed that the enhanced sensitivity
for this sensor is 12.82 % with respect to conventional SPR
sensor and 3.28 % with respect to graphene–MoS2-based
SPR sensor. At the end of this paper, the variation of the
& Y. K. Prajapati
yogendrapra@gmail.com
J. B. Maurya
jitendra.maurya06@gmail.com
V. Singh
viveksingh.bhuphysics@gmail.com
J. P. Saini
jps_uptu@rediffmail.com
1
Electronics and Communication Engineering Department,
Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh 211004, India
2 structures in biomolecules. In 2010, Song et al. [7] pre-
Department of Physics, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi,
Uttar Pradesh 221005, India
3 adsorption properties for high-resolution bio/nanodetection
Electronics and Communication Engineering Department,
Bundelkhand Institute of Engineering and Technology,
Jhansi, Uttar Pradesh 284128, India
sensitivity and minimum reflectance is plotted with respect
to sensing layer refractive index at the optimum thickness
of all the layers and optimum number of MoS2 and gra-
phene layers. It is also observed that four layers of MoS2
and monolayer graphene are best selection for the maxi-
mum enhancement of the sensitivity.
1 Introduction
On the basis of Kretschmann configuration of the surface
plasmon resonance (SPR) sensor, a metal layer, such as
gold (Au) or silver (Ag), is deposited on the base of a
prism, and this whole system is kept in contact with the
water or gas sample containing the targeted chemical or
biomolecule, also known as analytes, for sensing applica-
tion [1]. A detailed review and theory regarding such type
of conventional SPR sensor is given by Homola et al. [2].
In 2003, Homola et al. [3] explained the concept of
enhancing the attachment of analytes presented in the
sample by growing an affinity layer, a biomolecular
recognition element (BRE), on the surface of the metal
layer. Although many materials have been analyzed for
enhancing the performance of the SPR sensor, graphene is
superior among them because of its good optical absor-
bance and large surface-to-volume ratio due to its two-
dimensional (2D) nature [4]. In comparison with gold
surface, the graphene absorbs biomolecules more strongly
and stably, due to the p-stacking interactions [5, 6] between
graphene’s hexagonal cells and the carbon-based ring
sented a highly conductive material with excellent
and identification using graphene-on-gold. The key reason
behind this unique property is that graphene can stably [5]
123

adsorb carbon-based rings, which are widely present in
biomolecules, due to p-stacking interactions [6] while
pertaining the excellent conductivity of gold as substrate.
By using this concept, in 2010, Wu et al. [8] and, in 2014,
Verma et al. [9] presented an SPR sensor based on gra-
phene-on-gold for enhancing the performance of sensor.
Very recently, other 2D nanomaterial molybdenum
disulfide (MoS2), belonging to transition metal dichalco-
genides (TMDC), has been fabricated. The monolayer MoS2
has a much higher optical absorption co-efficiency (*5 %)
than that of the graphene layer (*2.3 %). The electron
energy loss of MoS2 layer is comparable to that of graphene
and this will allow a successful (*100 %) light energy
transfer to the graphene–MoS2-coated sensing substrate.
Such process will lead to a significant enhancement of SPR
signals [10]. The bandgap of the MoS2 is thickness depen-
dent, e.g., the bulk MoS2 has indirect bandgap, whereas the
monolayer MoS2 has direct bandgap, and graphene has
direct zero bandgap [11]. Hence, it can be said that graphene
is a conductor, while MoS2 is semiconductor. In semicon-
ductor, because of the bandgap, photon must exceed the
bandgap in semiconductor in order to cause photon excita-
tion and absorption. Hence, semi-conductors are susceptible
to only certain part of the spectrum, whereas graphene has
no such limitation. Graphene has equal absorption coeffi-
cient from UV to far IR light because it has zero bandgap
[12]. One can easily conclude, on the basis of above two
paragraphs, MoS2 has variable absorption co-efficiency,
whereas graphene has fixed. Hence, the amount of absorp-
tion per layer is variable with frequency of operation. MoS2
has attracted its application in the field of optoelectronics
due to its direct bandgap nature [13] and structure analogous
to the graphene for the detection of the biomolecules [14].
Hence, it is believed that MoS2 can be used in place of
graphene for the improvement in performance of the SPR
sensor. Furthermore, the performance of the sensor can be
enhanced by using graphene along with MoS2 rather using
only graphene or only MoS2. Very recently such a hybrid
structure of graphene–MoS2 has been used in the sensing
application by several research groups in the world. In 2014,
Loan et al. [15] presented a graphene/MoS2 heterostructure
for ultrasensitive detection of DNA hybridization. In 2015,
Zeng et al. [10] presented a graphene–MoS2 hybrid nanos-
tructures enhanced SPR biosensor. They showed that a
phase-sensitivity enhancement is achieved when proposed
sensor is compared with conventional sensor (without gra-
phene–MoS2) or sensor having only graphene.
Titanium dioxide (TiO2) and silicon dioxide (SiO2) have
purely real refractive index; hence, they can be used as
adherence layer just above the prism base. TiO2 has high
refractive index, whereas SiO2 has low at any particular
wavelength; hence, their combination of low refractive
index over high (SiO2 over TiO2) makes a composite layer
123
J. B. Maurya et al.
of TiO2–SiO2. As an adherence layer the composite layer
works better than the individual TiO2 and SiO2 [16, 17]
because plasmonic effect occurs near the TiO2–SiO2 inter-
face [18]. Due to this plasmonic effect near TiO2–SiO2
interface, the light trapping is effectively enhanced [19].
Because of this enhanced light trapping, more surface
plasmons (SPs) are generated which will eventually enhance
the resonance angle. This increase in resonance angle will
increase the SPR sensing. Hence, for the first time as per the
best of our knowledge, theoretical along with numerical
analysis of TiO2–SiO2 composite layers in a SPR biosensor
based on MoS2–graphene hybrid structure is proposed.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, the
modeling with mathematical expression is presented, and
the definition of performance parameters of SPR-based
sensor is also given. In Sect. 3, the results and discussion
are explained under several subsections. Finally, the con-
clusion and necessary references regarding the proposed
work are given.
2 Theoretical modeling with mathematical
expression
2.1 Structure of proposed SPR sensor
The structure of the proposed sensor comprises seven
layers, which is shown in Fig. 1. The thicknesses and
refractive indices (RI) of all the layers at operating wave-
length 632.8 nm are given as follows. The first layer is the
SF11 prism and its RI (n1) is 1.7786 [10]. The second layer
is TiO2 and its RI (n2) is 2.5837 [16]. The third layer is
SiO2 and its RI (n3) is 1.4570 [16]. The fourth layer is gold
(Au) and its RI (n4) is 0.1838 ? 3.4313i [10]. The thick-
nesses of second, third and fourth layers are optimized later
in this paper. The fifth layer is MoS2 and its RI (n5) is
5.9 ? 0.8i [10]. The thickness of MoS2 is given as
L 9 0.65 nm, where L is the number of MoS2 layers. The
sixth layer is graphene and its RI (n6) is 3 ? 1.1487i [10].
The thickness of graphene is given as G 9 0.34 nm, where
G is the number of graphene layers. The seventh layer is
sensing layer having RI (n7) of 1.33.
2.2 Principle of operation
The sensor is kept on a rotatory base such that the light can
be incident at different angles on a lateral plane of prism
for angular interrogation method. When a p-polarized (TM
electromagnetic field) light from a monochromatic light
source is incident on the prism by means of convex lens,
the SPs are generated at the metal–dielectric interface. A
resonance condition is achieved when the propagation
wave vector of surface plasmon wave (SPW) is exactly
Sensitivity enhancement of surface plasmon resonance sensor based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid…

Fig. 1 Structure of proposed

SPR-based optical sensor

!  
matched with that of the incident light. The particular angle Y
N 1
M11 M12
of incidence at which the minimum reflectance (Rmin) is Mij ¼ Mk ¼ ð2Þ
k¼2
M21 M22
obtained is known as resonance angle (hres) for the pres- ij
ence of concentration of biomolecules in the water sample. with
Nearby the resonance angle, an extremely strong evanes-  
cent field at metal–dielectric interface is generated by the cos bk ði sin bk Þ=qk
Mk ¼ ð3Þ
SPW, which decreases exponentially in both the media. At iqk sin bk cos bk
the resonance condition, the maximum intensity of the light
where
is used to generate the SPs because of which the intensity
 1=2  1=2
of the reflected light is minimum. As the concentration of lk ek  n21 sin2 h1
the biomolecules increases in the sample, the change in the qk ¼ cos hk ¼ ð4Þ
ek ek
hres takes place. Hence, one can measure the amount of
biomolecules present in the sample by measuring the shift and
in resonance angle (Dhres-). 2p 2pdk  1=2
bk ¼ nk cos hk ðzk  zk1 Þ ¼ ek  n21 sin2 h1
k k
2.3 Mathematical expression for reflectivity ð5Þ

The matrix method for N-layer model is applied for the cal- After some straightforward mathematical steps, one can
culation of reflectivity of the reflected light [9]. This method obtain the reflection coefficient for p-polarized light, which
is efficient and does not consider any approximation. The is given below:
thicknesses of the layers, dk, are considered along the z-axis. ðM11 þ M12 qN Þq1  ðM21 þ M22 qN Þ
The dielectric constant and RI of the kth layer are considered rp ¼ ð6Þ
ðM11 þ M12 qN Þq1 þ ðM21 þ M22 qN Þ
as ek and nk, respectively. By applying the boundary condi-
tion, the tangential fields at Z = Z1 = 0 are presented in The reflectivity Rp of the defined multilayer configuration
terms of the tangential field at Z = ZN-1 as follows: is given as:
     2
U1
¼M
UN1
ð1Þ Rp ¼  r p  ð7Þ
V1 VN1

where U1 and V1 represent the tangential components of
electric and magnetic fields, respectively, at the boundary
of the first layer and UN-1 and VN-1 are the corresponding
fields for the boundary at Nth layer. The Mij presents the
characteristics matrix of the combined structure of the
sensor, and for p-polarized light, it can be given as:
2.4 Performance parameters of the SPR sensor
The performance parameters of the SPR sensor are sensi-
tivity (S), detection accuracy (D.A.) and the quality factor,
all of which should be as high as possible for a good sensor
[9].

123

The S is defined as the ratio of shift in the resonance
angle of incidence (Dhres) to the RI change in the sensing
region (Dns):
S ¼ Dhres =Dns ð8Þ
The D.A., also known as signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), is
defined as the ratio of shift in resonance angle (Dhres) to the
full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the reflectance
curve:
D:A: ¼ Dhres =FWHM ð9Þ
The quality factor (Q) is defined as the ratio of sensi-
tivity (S) to the FWHM of the reflectance curve:
Q ¼ S=FWHM ð10Þ
3 Results and discussion
On defining the RI for all the layers of the proposed sensor,
first of all it is aimed to optimize the thickness of the TiO2,
SiO2 and gold layer at single layer of MoS2 and graphene.
For the optimization of these layers, thickness versus sen-
sitivity (S) and thickness versus minimum reflectance
(Rmin) are plotted. For the optimum thickness, sensitivity
should be as high as possible, whereas Rmin should be as
low as possible. At these optimum thicknesses, the reflec-
tance curve is plotted for different structures including the
proposed one. Thereafter, the effect of increasing the
number of MoS2 layers and graphene layers on the sensi-
tivity and Rmin is shown. Finally, the variation of sensitivity
and Rmin according to the sensing layer RI is presented.
3.1 Thickness optimization of layers
The variation of the sensitivity and minimum reflectance
with respect to the thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layers
is plotted in Fig. 2. During the simulation, all the layers are
added together and then the thickness of one layer at a time
is optimized by keeping the thickness of other layers fixed
at some particular general values such as TiO2 at 20 nm,
SiO2 at 40 nm and gold at 40 nm. It means, the thickness
of TiO2 is optimized, with respect to sensitivity and min-
imum reflectance, at the fixed thickness of SiO2 (40 nm)
and gold (40 nm). Then, SiO2 thickness is optimized, at
optimized thickness of TiO2 and gold thickness (40 nm).
Thereafter, gold thickness is optimized, at optimized
thickness of TiO2 and SiO2. These thicknesses are opti-
mized for the monolayer of MoS2 and graphene. The black
curves represent the sensitivity, whereas the blue curves
represent the Rmin. The square (h), circle (s) and triangle
(D) represent the sensitivity (black) and Rmin (blue) for
TiO2, SiO2 and gold layer thicknesses, respectively. The
123
J. B. Maurya et al.
Fig. 2 Optimization of the thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layers
with the help of sensitivity and minimum reflection for the monolayer
MoS2 and graphene
sensitivity, for the TiO2 layer thickness, is monotonically
increasing from 79.86213153 (/RIU) at 15 nm to
95.47113889 (/RIU) at 65 nm, whereas Rmin is varied
from 0.051854 at 15 nm to 0.052643 at 65 nm, and the
minimum value of Rmin is 0.050708 at 37 nm. For the
minimum value of Rmin and thickness of the sensor, the
optimum thickness of TiO2 layer is chosen as 37 nm. Now,
for the SiO2 layer thickness, the sensitivity is monotoni-
cally increasing from 81.581 (/RIU) at 15 nm to 82.55503
(/RIU) at 65 nm, whereas the Rmin is monotonically
increasing from 0.018337 at 15 nm to 0.097323 at 65 nm.
Hence, the optimum thickness of SiO2 layer, to minimize
the overall thickness of the sensor, is chosen as 20 nm.
Finally, for the gold layer thickness, the sensitivity of the
sensor is varied from 93.06472 (/RIU) at 26 nm to
84.9369 nm at 65 nm with maximum value 93.06472 (/
RIU) at 26 nm, whereas Rmin has minimum value of
0.0000918292 at 46 nm. Hence, one can easily conclude
that the optimum thickness of the gold layer should be
46 nm for the sake of minimum Rmin and adequate level of
sensitivity. Thus, based on above discussion the optimum
thicknesses of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layers are 37, 20 and
46 nm, respectively.
3.2 Reflectance curves
The variation of the reflection intensity in accordance with
the incidence angle is plotted in Fig. 3. The reflectance
curves at 1.33 and 1.40 RI of sensing layer are presented by
solid lines and dashed lines, respectively. Here the pro-
posed structure (with all layers of Fig. 1) is compared with
some other structures, defined in Table 1. The resonance
angle (hres) at 1.33 and 1.40 RI of sensing layer and
Sensitivity enhancement of surface plasmon resonance sensor based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid…

1 Now, FWHM is calculated from the reflectance curve

ns = 1.33 (solid lines)
0.9 ns = 1.40 (dashed lines) for different sensor structures and given in Table 2. For
calculating FWHM, the angles corresponding to the half
0.8
maxima of the reflectance curve are calculated, let the
0.7 lower and upper angles are denoted by hlow and hhigh,
Reflection intensity

0.6
w/o TiO2 ,SiO2 ,MoS2 ,graphene
0.5 w/o TiO2 ,SiO2 ,MOS2
0.4 w/o TiO2 ,SiO2 ,graphene
w/o TiO2 ,SiO2
0.3
w/o SiO2
0.2 w/o TiO2
with all
0.1
0
50 55 60 65 70 75
Incidence angle (deg.)
Fig. 3 Variation of the reflection intensity with respect to incidence
angle for different structures of SPR sensor including the proposed
one at the optimum thickness of TiO2 (37 nm), SiO2 (20 nm) and gold
(46 nm) layers for the monolayer MoS2 and graphene
corresponding change in resonance angle (Dhres), and the
minimum reflectance at 1.33 and 1.40 RI of sensing layer
are given in Table 1. One can easily observe from Fig. 3
that the shapes of the reflectance curves are maintained at
1.33 and 1.40 RI of the sensing layer, preserving the ade-
quate value of the minimum reflectance (see Table 1).
From Table 1, it can be seen that the Dhres for the con-
ventional sensor (Structure 1) is 5.21736, whereas for the
sensor having single layer of MoS2 and graphene it is
(Structure 4) 5.69921, and for the proposed sensor (Struc-
ture 7) it is 5.886. By the Eq. (8) of sensitivity, the percent
increase in sensitivity for Structure 4 over Structure 1 is
9.23 %, whereas the percent increase in sensitivity for
Structure 7 over Structure 1 is 12.82 %, and the percent
increase in sensitivity for Structure 7 over Structure 4 is
3.28 %. Thus, the proposed sensor is better than the sensor
having only graphene–MoS2, which is better than the
conventional sensor.
respectively, and then the FWHM can be calculated as
hhigh - hlow. With the help of this FWHM, at 1.33 sensing
layer refractive index (ns), the D.A. and Q.F. are calculated
with the help of Eqs. (9) and (10), respectively, and given
in Table 2. One can visualize from Table 2 that the D.A.
and Q.F. decrease on including the graphene or MoS2
layer. Including the graphene or MoS2 layer, the propa-
gation constant (wave vector) of the SPW shifts, due to
which the resonance is satisfied at different angle. The
80 85 90 wave vector shift is due to the extension of the SP field into
MoS2 and graphene layers with a propagation velocity of
electromagnetic waves smaller than in the adjacent med-
ium (sensing layer) that leads to decrease in the propaga-
tion velocity of SP wave and eventually results in damping
[20]. As a result, SPs become damped. Thus, on including
graphene or MoS2 layers, damping increases in SPs. Since
FWHM is a linear function of damping [21], it increases
with increasing the number of MoS2 or graphene layers
because of which, according to the Eqs. (9) and (10), the
D.A. and Q.F. also decrease. The decrement in D.A. and
Q.F. is more for the case of structure having MoS2 than that
of the graphene, because the FWHM in the case of MoS2 is
larger than that of graphene which is clearly visible from
Figs. 4 and 5. The greater FWHM in case of MoS2 might
be possibly due to its higher thickness than graphene.
Moreover, this decrement in D.A. and Q.F. further
increases when both of the layers graphene and MoS2 are
present. This further decrement is just because of the
increased thickness of overall nanolayers, graphene and
MoS2. Hence on the basis of the discussion made above, it
can be said that on including the graphene or MoS2, or
both, the sensitivity is improved, whereas the D.A. and
Q.F. are decreased.

Table 1 Arrangement of the resonance angle (hres), change in different structures at the optimum thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and gold
resonance angle (Dhres) and minimum reflectance (Rmin) correspond- layer for monolayer of MoS2 and graphene
ing to sensing layer refractive index of 1.33 and 1.40 for seven
Structure no. Layers in the structure hres () Dhres () Rmin
ns = 1.33 ns = 1.40 Dns = 0.07 ns = 1.33 ns = 1.40

1 w/o TiO2, SiO2, MoS2, graphene (conventional) 54.35765 59.57501 5.21736 0.00365 0.00231
2 w/o TiO2, SiO2, MoS2, 54.57137 59.85346 5.28209 0.00004 0.00045
3 w/o TiO2, SiO2, graphene 55.60212 61.21882 5.6167 0.00651 0.00967
4 w/o TiO2, SiO2, 55.86568 61.56489 5.69921 0.01741 0.02296
5 w/o SiO2 55.86224 61.71787 5.85563 0.01862 0.04953
6 w/o TiO2 55.88401 61.55228 5.66827 0.00357 0.0016
7 With all (proposed) 55.88974 61.77574 5.886 0.00411 0.01244

123
 J. B. Maurya et al.

Table 2 Arrangement of the FWHM corresponding to sensing layer refractive index of 1.33, S, D.A. and Q.F. for seven different structures at
the optimum thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layer for monolayer of MoS2 and graphene
Structure no. Layers in the structure At ns = 1.33 FWHM (hhigh - hlow) Performance
hlow () hhigh () S D.A. Q.F.

1 w/o TiO2, SiO2, MoS2, graphene (conventional) 53.08 56.86 3.78 74.53 1.38 19.72
2 w/o TiO2, SiO2, MoS2, 53.15 57.38 4.23 75.46 1.25 17.84
3 w/o TiO2, SiO2, graphene 53.75 59.45 5.7 80.24 0.98 14.07
4 w/o TiO2, SiO2, 53.86 60.09 6.23 81.42 0.91 13.07
5 w/o SiO2 53.81 59.92 6.11 83.65 0.96 13.69
6 w/o TiO2 53.76 61.05 7.29 80.97 0.78 11.11
7 With all (proposed) 53.70 60.88 7.18 84.09 0.82 11.71

1 1
Graphene MoS2
0.9 0.9

0.8 0.8
1- Layer 1- layer
0.7 0.7 2- layers
2- Layer

Reflection intensity
Reflection intensity

0.6 3- Layer 0.6 3- layers

4- Layer 4- layers
0.5 5- Layer 0.5 5- layers
6- Layer 6- layers
0.4 0.4
7-Layer 7- layers
0.3 8- Layer 0.3 8- layers
9- Layer 9- layers
0.2 0.2
10- Layer 10- layers
0.1 11- Layer 0.1 11- layers
12- Layer 12- layers
0 0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
Number of graphene layers Number of MoS 2 layers

Fig. 4 Variation of reflection intensity in accordance with the Fig. 5 Variation of reflection intensity in accordance with the
number of graphene layers, at the optimized thickness of TiO2, number of MoS2 layers, at the optimized thickness of TiO2, SiO2
SiO2 and gold layer for monolayer MoS2 and sensing layer refractive and gold layer for monolayer graphene and sensing layer refractive
index 1.33 index 1.33

3.3 Effect of number of graphene and MoS2 layers
Figures 4 and 5 present the reflectance curves for varying
number of graphene and MoS2 layers, respectively, at the
optimum thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and gold layer. Although
monolayer MoS2 has higher absorption than the bulk MoS2
[10], as the number of layers increases the absorption also
increases at the rate of absorption co-efficiency (for
monolayer MoS2 it is 5 % of incident light per layer). As
shown in Figs. 4 and 5, the SPR curves become broader
and shallower on increasing the number of MoS2 layer in
similar manner as the graphene [8, 22]. Also, it is clear
from Table 3 that on increasing the number of graphene or
MoS2 layers, the resonance angle shifts toward higher
value. This shifting of resonance angle toward higher value
along with the increased width of the reflectance curve, and
the higher magnitude of the minimum reflectance, as
shown in Table 3, resembles the dramatic variation in the
SPR signal induced by graphene and MoS2 coating onto
metal film [20]. This dramatic variation in the SPR curve
eventually results in the degradation of sensitivity [22].
Furthermore, Verma et al. [23] investigated that the addi-
tion of dielectric layer produces a peak in the sensitivity
curve with respect to number of graphene layers. More-
over, their analysis said that increasing the thickness of
dielectric layer, the peak corresponding to maximum sen-
sitivity shifts toward the lower number of graphene layers.
Figures 6 and 7, respectively, present the variation of
sensitivity and minimum reflectance in accordance with the
number of graphene layers at the optimum thickness of
TiO2, SiO2 and gold layer. In these figures, the curves are
plotted for the structure without (w/o) MoS2 layer (black
curve) and structures with number of MoS2 layer from one
to five. From Fig. 6, one can easily observe that the sen-
sitivity increases on increasing the number of MoS2 layers
up to four and graphene layers up to four. After four layers
of graphene, the sensitivity is getting disturbed. From
Fig. 7, it can be observed that Rmin for the structure without
MoS2 layer is minimum for two graphene layers, whereas
for the structure with MoS2 layers the Rmin increases

123
Sensitivity enhancement of surface plasmon resonance sensor based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid…

Table 3 Arrangement of values No. of MoS2 (with monolayer graphene) Graphene (with monolayer MoS2)
of resonance angle (hres) and MoS2 or
minimum reflectance (Rmin) for
graphene Rmin FWHM Rmin FWHM
different number of MoS2 (with
layers
monolayer graphene) and
1 55.88974 0.00411 7.18 55.88974 0.00411 7.18
graphene (with monolayer
2 57.63211 0.03055 10.48 56.16820 0.01259 7.83
MoS2) layers at the optimized
thickness of TiO2, SiO2 and 3 59.98983 0.07446 14.57 56.45812 0.02441 8.48
gold layer for sensing layer 4 63.20068 0.13492 18.47 56.76064 0.03869 9.13
refractive index 1.33 5 67.21311 0.22118 20.25 57.07462 0.05476 9.78
6 70.66690 0.34828 17.69 57.40178 0.07212 10.42
7 71.93256 0.49625 3.27 57.74097 0.09038 11.05
8 71.56186 0.61645 58.09334 0.10925 11.66
9 70.56262 0.69667 Rmin 58.45831 0.12850 12.25
10 69.40753 0.74797 is 58.83589 0.14797 12.8
11 68.27136 0.78141 high 59.22607 0.16753 13.32
12 46.69663 0.78261 59.62829 0.18708 13.79

120 0.7
w/o MoS 2
0.6 Monolayer
100 Bilayer
0.5 3-layers
Sensitivity (deg./RIU)

Minimum reflectance

4-layers
80 5-layers
0.4

60 w/o MoS 2 0.3

Monolayer
Bilayer 0.2
40 3-layers
4-layers 0.1
5-layers
20
0 5 10 15 20 0
0 5 10 15 20
Number of graphene layers
Number of graphene layers

Fig. 6 Variation of the sensitivity in accordance with number of

graphene layers for structures without (w/o) MoS2 and with mono-
layer to five layer of MoS2, at the optimum thickness of TiO2
(37 nm), SiO2 (20 nm) and gold (46 nm) layers for the monolayer
MoS2 and graphene
monotonically. Thus, on the basis of above discussion the
sensitivity is maximum for the single layer of graphene and
four layers of the MoS2 simultaneously, maintaining Rmin
approximately 0.1. Although one can choose sensor
structure having monolayer, bilayer or three layers of MoS2
at the monolayer of graphene for the sake of lower value of
Rmin, it is believed that monolayer of graphene and four
layers of MoS2 are best suited for the better sensitivity
while pertaining the lower value of Rmin.
Fig. 7 Variation of the minimum reflectance in accordance with
number of graphene layers for structures without (w/o) MoS2 and
with monolayer to five layers of MoS2, at the optimum thickness of
TiO2 (37 nm), SiO2 (20 nm) and gold (46 nm) layers for the
monolayer MoS2 and graphene
gold layer with four layers of MoS2 and monolayer gra-
phene. The black curve presents the sensitivity, whereas
blue represents the minimum reflectance. From Fig. 8, it is
clear that the sensitivity as well as Rmin increases on
increasing the sensing layer RI, but the rate of increase of
these two parameters is different.
3.5 Transverse magnetic (TM) field intensity plot

3.4 Sensitivity and minimum reflectance variation
with respect to sensing layer refractive index
The variation in the sensitivity and minimum reflectance in
accordance with the sensing layer refractive index is plot-
ted in Fig. 8 at the optimum thickness of SiO2, TiO2 and
Figure 9 depicts the behavior of transverse magnetic (TM)
field intensity for the proposed structure. It is well known
from the literature that as the reflectivity approaches to the
minimum value, the intensity of magnetic field approaches
to its maximum value. At the instant of strongest intensity
of the field, the maximum excitation of SP takes place due

123

Fig. 8 Variation of the sensitivity and minimum reflectance with
respect to the sensing layer refractive index at the optimum thickness
of TiO2 (37 nm), SiO2 (20 nm) and gold (46 nm) layers for the four
layers of MoS2 and monolayer graphene
TM field plot for the proposed structure
1
0.8
Prism (n1 = 1.7786)
TM field intensity
TiO2 (n2 = 2.5837)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0 tions. Alive and well in proteins. J. Biol. Chem. 273(25),
-50 0 37
Distance normal to the interface (nm)
Fig. 9 TM field intensity as a function of distance normal from
interface
to which the intensity of reflected light is minimum. It can
be easily seen from Fig. 9 that the field is increased at the
TiO2–SiO2 interface due to which plasmonic effect occurs
near this interface which in turn increases the sensitivity of
the proposed structure. Furthermore, gold layer enhances
the field and shows a peak at the gold–MoS2 interface
which represents the excitation of SPs at this interface. The
field intensity falls suddenly in the MoS2 and graphene
layers and then continued to decrease at approximately
constant rate and deeper in the sensing layer. One can also
say that by increasing the evanescent depth in the sensing
layer, the interaction volume of evanescent field with the
biomolecules is increased which in turn maximize the
sensitivity [24, 25].
123
J. B. Maurya et al.
4 Conclusion
In this analysis, a highly sensitive nanobiosensor based on
MoS2–graphene heterostructure with composite TiO2–SiO2
layers is presented. Our theoretical along with numerical
analysis shows that after adding the adherence layer, the
composite TiO2–SiO2, the sensitivity is enhanced and the
percent increase in sensitivity of the proposed sensor with
respect to conventional sensor is 12.82 %. It is further
investigated that on using the four MoS2 layers over
monolayer graphene, the sensitivity is improved. Hence, it
is believed that the proposed sensor can be used for better
sensing of biomolecules.
Acknowledgments The present work is partially supported by the
Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi, India,
under the fast track young scientist Scheme no. SB/FTP/ETA -0478/
2012.
References
1. E. Kretschmann, H. Raether, Radiative decay of non-radiative
surface plasmons excited by light. Z. Naturforsch. 23(A),
2135–2136 (1968)
2. J. Homola, S.S. Yee, G. Gauglitz, Surface plasmon resonance
Gold (n4 = 0.1838+3.4313i)
sensors: review. Sens. Actuators B 54, 3–15 (1999)
3. J. Homola, Present and future of surface plasmon resonance
biosensors. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 377, 528–539 (2003). doi:10.
SiO2 (n3 = 1.457)
1007/s00216-003-2101-0
Sensing layer (n7 = 1.332)
Graphene (n6 =3+1.1487i)
4. K.S. Novoselov, A.K. Geim, S.V. Morozov, D. Jiang, Y. Zhang,
MoS2 (n5 = 5.9+0.8i)
S.V. Dubonos, I.V. Grigorieva, A.A. Firsov, Electric field effect
in atomically thin carbon films. Science 306, 666–669 (2004)
←←
5. Z. Tang, H. Wu, J.R. Cort, G.W. Buchko, Y. Zhang, Y. Shao, I.A.
Aksay, J. Liu, Y. Lin, Constraint of DNA on functionalized
graphene improves its biostability and specificity. Small 6(11),
1205–1209 (2010)
6. G.B. McGaughey, M. Gagné, A.K. Rappé, p-Stacking interac-
57 103 153.99
15458–15463 (1998)
7. B. Song, D. Li, W.P. Qi, M. Elstner, C.H. Fan, H.P. Fang, Gra-
phene on Au (111): a highly conductive material with excellent
adsorption properties for high-resolution bio/nanodetection and
identification. ChemPhysChem 11(3), 585–589 (2010)
8. L. Wu, H.S. Chu, W.S. Koh, E.P. Li, Highly sensitive graphene
biosensors based on surface plasmon resonance. OSA Opt.
Express 18(14), 14395–14400 (2010)
9. A. Verma, A. Prakash, R. Tripathi, Performance analysis of
graphene based surface plasmon resonance biosensors for
detection of pseudomonas-like bacteria. Opt. Quantum Electron
(2014). doi:10.1007/s11082-014-9976-1
10. S. Zeng, S. Hu, J. Xia, T. Anderson, X.Q. Dinh, X.M. Meng, P.
Coquet, K.T. Yong, Graphene–MoS2 hybrid nanostructures
enhanced surface plasmon resonance biosensor. Sens. Actuators
B Chem. 207, 801–810 (2015)
11. J. Du, Q. Wang, G. Jiang, C. Xu, C. Zhao, Y. Xiang, Y. Chen, S.
Wen, H. Zhang, Ytterbium-doped fiber laser passively mode
locked by few-layer Molybdenum Disulfide (MoS2) saturable
absorber functioned with evanescent field interaction. Sci. Rep. 4,
6346 (2014). doi:10.1038/srep06346
12. B.K. Sharma, Solid State Physics and Devices-the Harbinger of
Third Wave of Civilization. I.C. chips of future generation part 3.
Sensitivity enhancement of surface plasmon resonance sensor based on graphene–MoS2 hybrid…
Carriers-phonon interaction in graphene. OpenStax-CNX mod-
ule: m44257, September 15 (2014)
13. K.F. Mak, C. Lee, J. Hone, J. Shan, T.F. Heniz, Atomically thin
MoS2: a new direct-gap semiconductor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105,
136805 (2010)
14. C. Zhu, Z. Zeng, H. Li, F. Li, C. Fan, H. Zhang, Single-layer
MoS2-based nanoprobes for homogeneous detection of biomo-
lecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 5998–6001 (2013)
15. P.T.K. Loan, W. Zhang, C.T. Lin, K.H. Wei, L.J. Li, C.H. Chen,
Graphene/MoS2 heterostructures for ultrasensitive detection of
DNA hybridization. Adv. Mater. 26, 4838–4844 (2014)
16. C.W. Lin, K.P. Chen, C.N. Hsiao, S. Lin, C.K. Lee, Design and
fabrication of an alternating dielectric multi-layer device for
surface plasmon resonance sensor. Sens. Actuators B 113,
169–176 (2006)
17. Y. Yuan, Y. Dai, A revised LRSPR sensor with sharp reflection
spectrum. Sensors 14, 16664–16671 (2014)
18. S.T. Kochuveedu, D.P. Kim, D.H. Kim, Surface-plasmon-in-
duced visible light photocatalytic activity of TiO2 nanospheres
decorated by Au nanoparticles with controlled configuration. Am.
Chem. Soc. 116, 2500–2506 (2012)
19. J. Xu, X. Xiao, A.L. Stepanov, F. Ren, W. Wu, G. Cai, S. Zhang,
Z. Dai, F. Mei, C. Jiang, Efficiency enhancements in Ag
nanoparticles-SiO2–TiO2 sandwiched structure via plasmonic
effect-enhanced light capturing. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 8, 73 (2013)
20. I. Pockrand, Surface plasma oscillations at silver surfaces with
thin transparent and absorbing coatings. Surf. Sci. 72, 577–588
(1978)
21. P.K. Maharana, R. Jha, S. Palei, Sensitivity enhancement by air
mediated graphene multilayer based surface plasmon resonance
biosensor for near infrared. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 190,
494–501 (2014)
22. S.H. Choi, Y.L. Kim, K.M. Byun, Graphene-on-silver substrate
for sensitive surface plasmon resonance imaging biosensor. Opt.
Soc. Am. Opt. Express 19(2), 458–466 (2011)
23. R. Verma, B.D. Gupta, R. Jha, Sensitivity enhancement of a
surface plasmon resonance based biomolecules sensor using
graphene and silicon layers. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 160,
623–631 (2011)
24. A. Shalabney, I. Abdulhalim, Electromagnetic fields distribution
in multilayer thin film structures and the origin of sensitivity
enhancement in surface plasmon resonance sensors. Sens. Actu-
ators A 159, 24–32 (2010)
25. W. Lee, D. Kim, Field-matter integral overlap to estimate the
sensitivity of SPR biosensors. J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 29(7),
1367–1376 (2012)
123