4.2 Article

Effect of Arrangement of Ag Nanodomes on Performance of Plasmonic Sensor

Journal

SENSORS AND MATERIALS
Volume 33, Issue 1, Pages 201-209

Publisher

MYU, SCIENTIFIC PUBLISHING DIVISION
DOI: 10.18494/SAM.2021.3071

Keywords

plasmon; refractive index sensor; biosensor; metal nanostructure arrays

Funding

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [JP 20K14748]
  2. Izumi Science and Technology Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The arrangement of Ag nanodomes has a noticeable impact on their optical properties and performance, with a reduction in PS bead surface coverage leading to decreased reflectance, a longer resonance wavelength, and improved bulk refractive index sensitivity. These findings suggest that optimization of the arrangement of Ag nanodomes is crucial for enhancing the performance of plasmonic biosensors.
In this study, we investigated the effect of the arrangement of Ag nanodomes on the performance of a plasmonic refractive index sensor. As a template of Ag nanodomes, polystyrene (PS) bead layers with surface coverages of 56 and 90% and a multilayered structure were created. The optical properties and sensing performance of Ag nanodomes were characterized by reflection spectroscopy and bulk refractive index sensing. The Ag nanodomes created on the closely packed and multilayered PS beads exhibited similar reflection spectra and bulk refractive index sensitivity. The differences between these Ag nanodomes were in the resonance wavelength and the corresponding reflective colors. By reducing the surface coverage of PS beads, the reflectance decreased, the resonance dip appeared at a longer wavelength, and the bulk refractive index sensitivity was improved to 516 nm per refractive index unit (RIU). The experimental results revealed that the arrangement of Ag nanodomes has a notable influence on their optical properties and needs to be optimized to improve the performance of plasmonic biosensors.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available