Recent advances in ion sensing with conducting polymers
- 202 Downloads
Ions are present throughout our environment—from biological systems to agriculture and beyond. Many important processes and mechanisms are driven by their presence and their relative concentration. In order to study, understand and/or control these, it is important to know what ions are present and in what concentration—highlighting the importance of ion sensing. Materials that show specific ion interaction with a commensurate change in measurable properties are the key components of ion sensing. One such type are conducting polymers. Conducting polymers are referred to as ‘active’ because they show observable changes in their electrical and optical (and other) properties in response to changing levels of doping with ions. For example, p-type conducting polymers such as poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) and polypyrrole, can transition from semi-conducting to metallic in response to increasing levels of anions inserted into their structure. Under certain circumstances, conducting polymers also interact with cations—showing their utility in sensing. Herein, recent advances in conducting polymers will be reviewed in the context of sensing ions. The main scope of this review is to critically evaluate our current understanding of ion interactions with conducting polymers and explore how these novel materials can contribute to improving our ion-sensing capabilities.
KeywordsConducting polymers Ions Sensing
atomic force microscopy
ion selective electrode
transmission electron microscopy
X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
Selective interactions between ions and materials are necessary but insufficient to developing ion-sensing capabilities. The interaction must also produce quantifiable and reversible property changes over a short time period. If the change in property can be related to the presence and concentration of an ion of interest, then an effective ion sensor may be feasible.
Inherent properties and example applications of conducting polymers
An inherent property of conducting polymers with dopants
Batteries or capacitor materials 
Electrochromic displays 
Reactivity of electron–hole pairs
Organic light emitting diodes (OLED) 
Antistatic foils and electronic devices 
Structural change and volume
Tissue engineering applications 
Corrosion protection 
Diffusion and adsorption
Compound release 
Work function, generation of electron–hole pairs
Components of organic solar cells 
Electrochemical reaction sites
Conducting polymers are generally defined by polymer chains that contain an extended conjugated backbone (alternating single and double bonded carbon atoms), with neighbouring chains aligned by π–π stacking. The conjugated backbone defines an extended π-bonded structure, along which delocalized charges that can move. In the context of this review, the charges in the conjugated backbone are created/stabilized by insertion of ions near the polymer chain. In most cases, positive charges (holes) are stabilized in the π-bonded structure by doping the polymer with anions. This insertion process is known as doping, with the removal of anions known as dedoping; where doping accompanies the oxidation of the conducting polymer and dedoping leads to a reduction. It is this change in oxidation level that leads to the polymer properties being altered, hence providing a means by which to ‘sense’ the presence or absence of ions. A dedoped polymer may be redoped by exposing it to another reservoir of ions.
The properties of conducting polymers are dependent on the number of charge carriers within. These charge carriers depend on the number of ions doping the polymer. The influence of doping on the resultant properties is typically explained using the electronic bandgap model. In the fully reduced state, the conducting polymer will act as an insulator. Upon low levels of doping degenerate states are created within the energy gap, leading to a decrease in the bandgap and semiconducting behaviour being observed . Some conducting polymers can display (semi-)metallic behaviour as the doping level increases towards the fully oxidized polymer and the bandgap disappears .
Both the electrical and optical change in conducting polymers can be used as transduction methods in sensing ions. This does not preclude other properties of the conducting polymer being monitored/measured, however few studies look at other properties of conducting polymers. One property that is studied (though not in the context of sensing) as a function of doping is the thermoelectric property [29, 30, 31, 32].
Structures and names of several commonly studied and readily available conducting polymers
Name of the conducting polymer
Poly(3,4-ethylenedioxy thiophene) (PEDOT)
Poly(3,4-propylenedioxy thiophene) (PProDoT)
Poly(3-hexyl thiophene) (P3HT)
Poly(p-phenylene vinylene) (PPV)
The conducting polymers are a subset of the broader class of conjugated polymers. It is worth mentioning that a range of conjugated polymers are also being researched for ion-sensing . For example, Xu et al. have utilised electropolymerised conjugated polymers from aromatic molecules for sensing of different metals in the environment [42, 43, 44, 45].
This review will focus on aspects of conducting polymers that define their use in ion sensing, with particular emphasis on literature from the past decade. Reviews covering details of the earlier work are contained in [46, 47, 48, 49]. Deliberately, the discussion will avoid gas sensing, as many gases are not charged (see other reviews [50, 51, 52]). To achieve a conducting polymer material that responds to ions, its physical and/or chemical structure needs to be modified, or controlled. The following section will generally discuss research into (physical and/or chemical) the structuring of conducting polymers.
Structuring of conducting polymers
Conducting polymers offer several possibilities for the development of ion sensors, however, they have some inherent limitations regarding solubility, long term stability and conductivity. To overcome these, conducting polymers have been modified, or hybridized with other heterogenous material components, which has led to materials with much improved properties and a range of new applications. When these modifications are successful, they lead to conducting polymers with high flexibilities, conductivities and mechanical stabilities, making these a key component in several applications, including sensors . Various approaches have been taken in the synthesis of such hybrid materials and of particular significance is the template used in the synthesis reaction, the oxidizing agent, and the order of addition of each component.
Looking specifically at conducting polymer applications in chemical and biochemical sensors, there have been a variety of approaches to their modifications dating back to the mid-1980s. One of the more useful approaches to improve the selectivity of resulting chemical sensors, is via the functionalization of the conducting polymers. Polymerization of dibenzo-crown ethers with cation-complexing properties opened a new way for the construction of ion-complexing conducting polymers . By using functional dopants, such as tetrasulfonated dibenzo-18-crown-6 , or by covalent binding of ion recognition sites as side-groups to the conducting polymer backbone [56, 57], ion-selectivity was introduced into conducting polymers. Other types of chemical sensors have been possible by using other functional groups attached to conducting polymers.
Since oxidized conductive polymers have a polycationic backbone, they can therefore serve as anion exchangers, which results in an anionic potential response. We know that various small anions can contribute to the measured potential (such as chloride, bromide, nitrate, perchlorate and thiocyanate), which implies that the anionic response of conductive polymers is non-selective [58, 59]. However, some conducting polymers may possess selectivity for specific ions, such as a proton (H+) and perchlorate [60, 61].
Immobilization of doping anions to obtain an excess negative charge gives a conducting polymer with cation-exchange behaviour, which results in a cationic potentiometric response . The potentiometric response originates partly from the chemical structure of the conducting polymer backbone and partly from the inserted doping ions. In order to enhance the selectivity to the target analyte, it is possible to modify the chemical structure of the conducting polymer by covalent bonding of suitable receptors, or by the immobilization of functional dopants that are selective to the target analyte.
Data from the literature confirms a change of dopant within the conducting polymer has a large effect on the sensor sensitivity by changing a physical transduction property. Conversely the different dopant ion does not markedly affect the ion selectivity of the polymer. In order to achieve new selectivity by changing the dopant ion, some researchers have explored functionalised dopants (see within this review for examples ). These dopants then directly interact with the ion of interest, while the properties of the conducting polymer are still used to quantify the ion concentration.
Another method of polymer modification is via post-polymerization functionalization. Today, the most widely used tool for post polymerization functionalization is ‘click’ chemistry. Wei et al.  have carried out post polymerization functionalization using thiolene click chemistry, on poly(3,4-propylenedioxythiophene) (PProDOT). Modification of P(ProDOT-diene) with polyethylene oxide thiol (o-(2-mercaptoethyl)-o′-methyl-hexa(ethylene glycol)) showed (via cyclic voltammetry) that both the redox peak and oxidation onset potentials in the modified polymer film had shifted to a more positive potential. The ion transport enabled by the extra chain length of thiol, also leads to a much larger charge storage capacity of the polymer film. Overall this method facilitates fine-tuning of the surface chemistry of these films, leading to improved charge transfer and wettability, as well as enhanced ion selectivity.
The term charge transfer refers to a succession of interactions between two molecules, ranging from a very weak donor–acceptor dipolar interactions to interactions that result in the formation of an ion pair, depending on the extent of electron delocalization. Charge transfer complexes are formed between electron-rich donor molecules and electron deficient acceptors. Typically, donor molecules are electron rich heterocycles  (e.g., furan, pyrrole, thiophene), aromatics with electron-donating substituents, or compounds with free, nonbonding pairs of electrons. Acceptor molecules are electron deficient systems such as purines and pyrimidines or aromatics with electron-withdrawing substituents.
Incorporation of pyridyl based ligands in conducting polymers showed better functionality for the development of sensors [69, 70, 71]. These ligands are placed in direct-π communication with the backbone tethered by alkyl chains . Coordination of metal ions may lead to an alteration in the conformal change and it affects the electrical, optical, and electrochemical properties of conducting polymers. In this project, functional complexes were incorporated in the conducting polymers and were used to define the optical properties and structural morphology of conducting polymers with respect to ion uptake.
Such approaches to manipulate the polymer’s structure can be exploited to improve the material’s function for a particular application and characterized to improve our understanding of the material’s properties. The following section will explore ion interactions with conducting polymers in more detail.
Ion interactions with conducting polymers
The mechanism and behaviour of the oxidation and reduction in conducting polymers, has an influence on the polymer’s utility in sensing. To this end, research into the doping process is of interest that accompanies the oxidation or reduction of the polymer. This section will discuss this research, though not necessarily restricting it to systems that result in sensing.
Polymer properties defined by doping ions
As indicated in the Introduction, the properties of a conducting polymer depend on the doping level of ions within. The type of ion used to dope the conducting polymer has been reported to impact on the resultant properties as well.
In the late 1980’s, Warren et al.  electropolymerized polypyrrole (and poly-3-methylthiophene) from an extensive range of electrolyte solutions. By changing the electrolyte in which the conducting polymers were synthesized, a significant difference in electrical conductivity was observed (3 orders of magnitude for polypyrrole). By creating free-standing thin films for X-ray diffraction and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analysis, the resultant change in structure and morphology was rationalised as the reason for the property change. In this case, it was concluded that the dopant anions define different structures within the conducting polymer, and thus result in different electrical properties.
To highlight the complexity of structure–property relationships in doped conducting polymers, slightly contrary conclusions were drawn by Hao et al. for doped polyaniline . Herein a range of anions (camphorsulphonate, tosylate, chloride, perchlorate, sulphate and phosphate) were exchanged within the polymer thin film using electrochemical cycling. While the exchange was observed via the changes in the electrochemical and optical properties of the polymer, morphology studies indicated that the property changes were independent of any changes in structure. This may originate from differences in the inherent polymer behavior owing to the different chemistry between polyaniline and polypyrrole.
Further to this discussion, Rudd et al. used a vapor polymerization process to fabricate and study poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) . They showed, both theoretically and experimentally, the influence of different dopants on the properties of poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene). By using an electrochemical redox process, they removed tosylate ions used during polymerization and exchanged them with other anions of interest. When tosylate (redoping), perchlorate and nitrate are employed, they achieve the same doping level yet differing electrical and optical properties. Similarly, despite a lower doping level, chloride and phenylphosphate also resulted in differing properties. Density functional theory calculations indicated that the electron density along the polymer chain is similar for each inserted anion. X-ray diffractograms suggested that the anions impart subtly different chain stacking/packing, that in turn define different conducting polymer properties (supporting the statements of Warren et al. for polypyrrole).
Given the apparent link between the polymer structure and the resultant properties, Rolland et al.  undertook a theoretical study to link the morphology and charge carrier mobility for poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) doped with tosylate. Central to this study was determining whether crystallinity was a sufficient enough criterion for good charge transport within the conducting polymer. The study concluded that π–π stacking of the polymer chains was the most important factor in defining the charge transport properties, rather than a highly crystalline structure. In fact, high levels of π–π connections between chains that lead to a percolated network facilitated high charge carrier mobility (hence high electrical conductivity). It could be inferred that those doping ions that enhance the π–π interactions between neighbouring polymer chains, will be most successful at enhancing the electrical conductivity (or similar properties).
It is possible to exchange the doping ions within the conducting polymer through chemical treatment, rather than electrochemically. Inganas et al. , showed the (reversible) ion exchange mechanism in polypyrrole, by treating it with an alkaline solution. They showed that the alkaline treatment decreases the electrical conductivity and changes the optical properties. It is rationalized that deprotonation/protonation of the nitrogen in the pyrrole unit, defines whether a single electron remains on the conjugated backbone (allowing for recombination with holes). Crispin et al.  undertook a similar study using vapor deposited poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) doped with tosylate. Ion exchange was achieved by exposure to hydrochloric acid or sodium hydroxide solutions. The chloride or hydroxide ions imparted changes in the packing structure of the conducting polymer. However, this alone could not explain the changes in the polymers’ thermoelectric properties. Beyond the changes in structure, the oxidation level of the polymer also changed. This highlights that the anions themselves play a critical role in defining the conducting polymer properties, through modification of the oxidation level and the structure/morphology. More specifically the conducting polymers have a primary redox state that relates to electron transfer and many secondary states or transitions that relate to other changes in molecular structure. In a similar manner, de Geyer and co-workers utilised sulfuric acid treatment to dramatically enhance the electrical conductivity of poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) doped with triflate anions . The hydrogen sulfate ions have less steric hinderance than triflate, increasing the oxidation level and the structural order.
From the perspective of future research, the interplay between ion properties, doping level, oxidation level, and structure, will be critical to understanding how doped conducting polymers behave. From this understanding should come utility in ion sensing with conducting polymers. Thus far the discussion has focused on the equilibrium state of the conducting polymer at the respective doping level of interest. However, in the context of sensing it is also important to understand the dynamics of the doping process.
Dynamics of doping/dedoping process
In the process of sensing, the active material will generally be utilised in some finite volume—be it a thin film, all the way through to a bulk volume of material. Thus, the ability for ions to easily and readily diffuse in and out of the material becomes an important consideration. This section will discuss recent work exploring the doping/dedoping process in conducting polymers.
Early work of Kaufman, Kanazawa and Street, presented a gravimetric electrochemical voltage spectroscopy technique to study the process of doping and dedoping of polypyrrole in a lithium perchlorate electrolyte . For this system they show that the mass of the polymer film increases upon full electrochemical reduction. The increase in mass leads to the conclusion that cations (lithium) are taken up by the material, leading to charge neutralisation of the anions through the creation of a salt. In the process, prior to full reduction, some perchlorate liberation is observed, which transitions into lithium uptake at greater levels of reduction. This indicates that only a proportion of the perchlorate ions are mobile and hence able to diffuse from the polymer structure. The remaining perchlorate act as sites for the highly mobile lithium to bind. The reverse is true upon oxidation, in that lithium is initially expelled prior to the uptake of perchlorate at higher oxidation levels. When tosylate is used as the anion (with lithium as the cation) in the same experiments, there is mass loss at all stages of the electrochemical reduction process. This indicates the tosylate is expelled from the polypyrrole at all reduction levels, and no cation uptake is observed. Pel and Inganas, in a later study using volume changes observed via bending of a biopolymer strip, substantiate the mass transport and insertion of cations during the reduction process . More recently, Latonen et al.  explored the ion exchange behaviour of polypyrrole doped with large anions. In this case the anion is immobile within the conducting polymer matrix—leading to anion-cation interaction driving the uptake of cations upon electrochemical reduction.
In the case of poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) doped with polystyrene sulfonate, the polyanion is also relatively immobile—allowing for ionic mobility of cations within. Stavrinidou et al. explored the mobility of various cations within thin films of as-deposited and crosslinked polymers . They show that a variety of cations (protons, potassium, sodium and choline) have increased mobility within the conducting polymer matrix compared to that in bulk water (highlighting electro-osmotic contributions). Also, as the hydration sphere of the cation increases, its mobility within the conducting polymer matrix decreases. Adding to this complexity of anion vs. cation diffusion into or out of the conducting polymer, evidence also exists that counter flows of solvent are also present . Hence, the relative diffusion rates of ions and solvent in and out of the conducting polymer are important for the doping/dedoping process.
This observation is predicted from analysis of the modified Nernst-Planck equation . In the case of the diffusion-migration model for coupled transport (both electronic and ionic charge carriers), the enhancement of inter-site hopping (of electronic charge carriers) increases as the mobility of counter ions decreases. As the doping level increases then migration (ion diffusion) diminishes. With a better understanding of how ions can interact with conducting polymers and the techniques by which to control their structure, it is possible to use these to sense and differentiate between ions.
Ion sensing in conducting polymers
Ion sensors perform three functions; (i) analyte (molecular) recognition , (ii) transduction and (iii) signalling. These functions are performed in parallel, where the analyte recognition induces a measurable change in the properties of materials (transduction) that can be quantified using some form of (opto-) electronic signalling system.
Transduction: Involves the transfer of chemical information to measurable electrical (change in electrical signal), optical (change in colour) or thermal (change in heat) signals, which in turn define the quantity of absorbed specific analyte .
Signalling: Involves the signal processing analysis of transduction information to digital/analog (e.g. capacitance/resistance) output.
A common ion sensing approach is use of ion selective electrodes (ISE). Typically, ISEs are membrane electrodes that produce an electrical potential by converting the activity of ions dissolved in a solution. The change in potential can be measured with the help of an electrical circuit (such as a voltmeter, or potentiostat) and reflects the change in selective ion concentration . In 1906, Cremer discovered the first ISE by using a glass electrode to measure the pH of an aqueous solution .
Ion selective materials can be fouled by chemical or biological species and other organic solutes.
Interference by other ions.
Electrodes may be fragile and have limited shelf life.
In an attempt to overcome these limitations, conducting polymers can be used as the ion selective material and also as a transducer, because they are environmentally stable and electrically conductive. Conducting polymers show strong promise to replace metal-based materials that can be easily corroded by the surrounding environment. Much work is still required however to assess the issues of interference and fouling. Furthermore, it may be beneficial to combine the ionophores into or onto the conducting polymers to realise efficiency and/or stability gains in the overall device.
Bobacka et al. have extensively studied ion sensing and conducting polymers. For example, they describe the selectivity of silver ions with poly-3-octyl thiophene . While the observation that immobile and lipophilic anions within the conducting polymer matrix showing sub-Nernstian responses to silver is logical, the potentiometric response of undoped polymer to silver is less so. This implies an inherent property of the conducting polymer to directly interact with the cation, as opposed to the electrostatic anion-cation interaction being the primary mechanism. In this case, silver is known to interact with sulphur (heteroatom in the thiophene) and carbon–carbon double bonds (π-bonded structure of the polymer). Exploiting this type of interaction between cations and conducting polymers, they employed poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) as an ion-to-electron transducer in a calcium-selective electrode . In relation to the anions, they very recently showed that polypyrrole membranes (doped with tosylate, camphorsulphonate, or hexafluorophosphate) could not only be used to control anion transport, but to separate monovalent from divalent anions . As a practical example, toxic hydrogen arsenate could be separated from nitrate and chloride using electrochemical switching. Studies such as this give insight into a range of yet unexplored behaviours, mechanisms and applications for conducting polymers interacting with ions.
Bomar et al. developed a nitrate selective electrode by using electropolymerized N-methyl pyrrole in a supporting electrolyte of potassium nitrate . The reported advantage of using N-methyl pyrrole, over pyrrole alone, is that the attached methyl group should hinder protonation of the nitrogen atom in acidic media. Choosing electropolymerization to prepare the conducting polymer resulted in a high degree of branching and cross linking that lead to mechanical stability under electrochemical cycling. The authors refer to this as an ion-imprinted polymer which yields a superior ISE over more traditional nitrate selective variants. Hyodo et al. investigated the same N-methyl pyrrole for sulphate ion sensing . Unfortunately, over-oxidation of the polymer was observed, with the formation of carbonyl groups together with associated structural change. This highlights that tailoring of the conducting polymer, doping anion, and resultant structure, are all key to specific ion sensing.
Upon further analysis, it was found that the concentration of nitrate increases with the increase in conductivity of reduced poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene), and was later confirmed using ion chromatography. From the analysis, the authors hypothesized that π–π interaction occurs between the anions and the aromatic ring of poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) and deals with supramolecular chemistry.
In more recent studies Rudd et al. reported the structure–property-performance of vapor phase polymerized poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) for sensing nitrate ions . In order to understand this mechanism, poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) samples were prepared by changing several aspects of the oxidant solution (concentration of oxidant, solvent used, and additives employed). They hypothesized that the change in the polymerization kinetics leads to a change in the morphology, structure and electrical conductivity. Among the electrical properties of vapor phase polymerized poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene), the structure and morphology may also play a role in the selectivity for nitrate. Further analysis with X-ray diffraction indicated that an increase in the ordering of poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) is proportional to the doping level of anions.
Hence, the structure–property relationships of other conducting polymers need to be investigated for further development of conducting polymer based ion sensors.
Conducting polymers are interesting materials with properties that depend on their doping level and structure. Doping being the insertion of ions into the polymer structure, which in turn affects the oxidation level of the conducting polymer. Because the conducting polymer properties change as a function of their oxidation, they show promise for ion sensing.
Researchers have shown that a general set of rules for how conducting polymers and ions interact is difficult to define. That is, several factors influence the interaction. These range from the chemistry of the conducting polymer to the method of fabrication. The choice of the counterion used during fabrication is just as critical as the specific ion that is chosen to be sensed.
The interaction itself is also not easily defined, as large anions within the conducting polymer matrix are relatively immobile, and hence lead to the material interacting with cations within the neighboring solution. Conversely, smaller anions spontaneously exchange with the electrolyte inferring anion sensing with the conducting polymer. In parallel with ion movement in and out of the polymer, there is also evidence to suggest solvent flux also.
When the functionality and nature of the anion or conducting polymer are modified to include other interaction mechanisms (beyond Coulombic attraction), then further sensing opportunities arise. These include π-ion interactions between the ion of interest and the conjugated backbone of the conducting polymer.
As the fundamental understanding of these materials is expanded, along with the resultant properties, which can be modified and measured (optical, electrical, optoelectronic, electrochemical, thermoelectric, etc.), the ways in which ion sensing can be achieved with conducting polymers will also suitably expand.
VS, SR, ES, KZ, PT and DE jointly wrote the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
SR acknowledges the support of the Commonwealth Government of Australia through the Innovation Connections Grant (ICG000582). DE acknowledges the support of the Australian Research Council (DP170104367, FT160100300). The funding body did not play any role in the design of the study or collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, nor in the writing the manuscript.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
- 3.Wen LA, Baohua G, Mattes QR. Fabricating conducting polymer electrochromic devices using ionic liquids. J Electrochem Soc. 2004;151(2):33–9.Google Scholar
- 58.Dong S, Sun Z, Lu Z. A new kind of chemical sensor based on a conducting polymer film. ChemComm. 1988;15:993–5.Google Scholar
- 62.Mohammad F. Specialty polymers: materials and applications. New Delhi: IK International Pvt Ltd; 2007.Google Scholar
- 86.Inzelt G. Redox transformations and transport processes. Conducting polymers: Springer; 2012. p. 191–244.Google Scholar
- 89.Konstantin N. Ion-selective electrodes. In: Carpenter B, Ceroni P, Kirchner B, Koskinen A, Landfester K, Leszczynski J, et al., editors. St. Petersburg: Springer; 2013.Google Scholar
- 92.Philippe BLDC. Ion-selective electrodes with ionophore-doped sensing membranes. Supramol Chem Mol Nanomater. 2012;3:2539–76.Google Scholar
- 94.Wroblewski W, Wojciechowski K, Dybko A, Bianca H, et al. Uranyl salophenes as ionophores for phosphate-selective electrodes. Sensor Actuat. 2003;68:3113–318.Google Scholar
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.