SMILES:
CC(=O)C1=CC=CC=C1

Aroma Description:
sweet, pungent, hawthorn, mimosa, almond, acacia, chemical1

Receptor Expression log10 EC50 Adj. Top Antagonist? Correlated Perceptual Qualities
OR1E3 ? - 10 6  (insufficient data)
OR5R1 34 -5.6 3 7.8947 3  spearmint, acacia, hawthorn, mimosa, chemical, coumarinic, sweet, hay, tonka, almond
OR11H12 92 -5.4 3 7.8947 3  spearmint, acacia, hawthorn, chemical, mimosa, sweet, coumarinic
OR5P3 100 -3.9 5 9.6 5  mimosa, hawthorn, spearmint, coumarinic, hay, sweet, acacia, orangeflower, powdery, naphthyl
OR1G1 61 - 7.1066 4  sweet, waxy, citrus, fresh, tart, orange, aldehydic, floral, rose, fatty
OR2W1 53 -4.37 5 -  sweet, tart, hay, fatty, coumarinic, orange, peony, cinnamon, herbal, tonka
OR4M1 ? - 5.5 8  corn, acacia, pungent, hazelnut, chemical, hawthorn, sweet, mimosa
OR52D1 100 - 4.3655 4  dairy, cheesy, anise, milky, creamy, sour, sharp, peach, lactonic, rancid
OR10H1 100 -1.6 2 0.1064 2  marine, greasy, sandalwood, oily, waxy, woody
OR10J5 84 - 0 5   
OR1A1 73 - 0 5   
OR2C1 100 - 0 5   
OR2J2 92 - 0 5   
OR51E1 100 - 0 5   
OR51L1 88 - 0 5   
OR5A1 100 - 0 7   
OR5A2 100 - 0 7   
OR5AN1 100 - 0 7   
 

SMILES:
CC(=O)C1=CC=CC=C1

Aroma Description:
sweet, pungent, hawthorn, mimosa, almond, acacia, chemical

Receptor Expr.% Agonist? Dock Score Known agonist Correlated Perceptual Qualities

Dock Score is a measure of how strongly the algorithm thinks the odorant is likely to be an agonist of the receptor.
Receptors in italics are "orphans", i.e. receptors whose agonists have not been identified experimentally.

1.) The Good Scents Company

2.) Mainland JD, Li YR, Zhou T, Liu WL, Matsunami H. Human olfactory receptor responses to odorants. Sci Data. 2015 Feb 3;2:150002. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2015.2. PMID: 25977809; PMCID: PMC4412152.

3.) Xiaojing Cong, Wenwen Ren, Jody Pacalon, Claire A. de March, Lun Xu, Hiroaki Matsunami, Yiqun Yu, Jérôme Golebiowski Functions of olfactory receptors are decoded from their sequence https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.06.895540

4.) Guenhael Sanz, Claire Schlegel, Jean-Claude Pernollet and Loic Briand Comparison of Odorant Specificity of Two Human Olfactory Receptors from Different Phylogenetic Classes and Evidence for Antagonism Chemical Senses vol. 30 no. 1 (2005) doi:10.1093/chemse/bji002

5.) Saito H, Chi Q, Zhuang H, Matsunami H, Mainland JD. Odor coding by a Mammalian receptor repertoire. Sci Signal. 2009 Mar 3;2(60):ra9. doi: 10.1126/scisignal.2000016. PMID: 19261596; PMCID: PMC2774247.

6.) V. Matarazzo, O. Clot-Faybesse, B. Marcet, G. Guiraudie-Capraz, B. Atanasova, G. Devauchelle, M. Cerutti, P. Etiévant, C. Ronin, Functional Characterization of Two Human Olfactory Receptors Expressed in the Baculovirus Sf9 Insect Cell System, Chem. Sens. 30 (2005) 195-207.

7.) Keiichi Yoshikawa, Jun Deguchi, Hu Jieying et al. Diverse yet selective tuning of an odorant receptor for sensing four classes of musk compounds, 03 August 2022, PREPRINT (Version 1) available at Research Square [https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1916850/v1]

8.) Zhao W, Ho L, Varghese M, Yemul S, Dams-O'Connor K, Gordon W, Knable L, Freire D, Haroutunian V, Pasinetti GM. Decreased level of olfactory receptors in blood cells following traumatic brain injury and potential association with tauopathy. J Alzheimers Dis. 2013;34(2):417-429. doi: 10.3233/JAD-121894. PMID: 23241557; PMCID: PMC3968322.

×
 
 

Code version:
 

Docker used:
 

Files:
Active model: text 3D download
Inactive model: text 3D download
Active dock: text 3D download
Inactive dock: text 3D download
JSON entry: text   download