SMILES:
CC12CCC3C(C1CC=C2)CCC4C3(CCC(=O)C4)C
Aroma Description:
animal, musky1
| Receptor | Expression | log10 EC50 | Adj. Top | Antagonist? | Correlated Perceptual Qualities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR7D4 | 96 | -5.39 2, -5.92 4, -6.87 8, -6.89 9 | 1.0801 2, 10 4 | animal, citrus, orange, peely, tart, aldehydic, blueberry | |
| OR4D1 | 100 | - | 10 6 | animal | |
| OR8B2 | 88 | -4.74 2 | 1.0966 2 | animal | |
| OR2J2 | 92 | -5 2 | 0.2033 2, 0 3 | tart, sweet, carnation, hay, orange, warm, cinnamon, clove, coumarinic | |
| OR7C1 | 100 | -4.54 2 | 0.1833 2 | ambergris, woody, amber | |
| OR4X2 | 53 | -4.52 2 | 0.1983 2 | grape, sweet, animal | |
| OR6Q1 | 92 | -4.46 2 | 0.1408 2 | (insufficient data) | |
| OR4F17 | 92 | -4.32 2 | 0.1822 2 | clove, animal | |
| OR5R1 | 34 | -4.15 2 | 0.1662 2 | spearmint, acacia, hawthorn, mimosa, chemical, coumarinic, sweet, hay, tonka, almond | |
| OR1B1 | 100 | - | 3.8462 7 | cotton_candy, jammy, sweet, caramellic | |
| OR10A5 | 100 | -3.26 2 | 0.7467 2 | candy, cinnamon, warm | |
| OR10A6 | 100 | -3.06 2 | 0.4989 2 | peach, sweet, coconut, floral, lactonic, cyclamen, neroli, waxy, dairy, honey | |
| OR9G1 | ? | -2.67 2 | 0.0602 2 | carnation, malty, clove, candy, warm | |
| OR10G6 | ? | -2.42 2 | 0.0848 2 | vanilla, clove, whisky | |
| OR1C1 | 100 | - | 1 3 | blueberry, bois_de_rose, sweet, rose, citrus | |
| OR10G3 | 96 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR10G7 | 80 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR10J5 | 84 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR11A1 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR2A25 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR2B11 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR2J3 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR51E1 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR51L1 | 88 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR56A4 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR5K1 | 100 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR8D1 | 96 | - | 0 3 | ||
| OR8K3 | 92 | - | 0 3 | ||
| VN1R1 | ? | - | 0 5 | ||
| OR5I1 | 46 | - | 0 7 | ||
| OR1A1 | 73 | - | -1.4333 3 | ||
| OR2W1 | 53 | - | -2.3333 3 | ||
| OR5P3 | 100 | - | -2.6667 3 |
SMILES:
CC12CCC3C(C1CC=C2)CCC4C3(CCC(=O)C4)C
Aroma Description:
animal, musky
| 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.) Adipietro KA, Mainland JD, Matsunami H (2012) Functional Evolution of Mammalian Odorant Receptors. PLoS Genet 8(7): e1002821. doi:10.1371/ journal.pgen.1002821
4.) Keller A, Zhuang H, Chi Q, Vosshall LB, Matsunami H. Genetic variation in a human odorant receptor alters odour perception. Nature. 2007 Sep 27;449(7161):468-72. doi: 10.1038/nature06162. Epub 2007 Sep 16. PMID: 17873857.
5.) I. Wallrabenstein, J. Gerber, S. Rasche, I. Croy, S. Kurtenbach, T. Hummel, H. Hatt, The smelling of Hedione results in sex-differentiated human brain activity, NeuroImage, Volume 113, 2015, Pages 365-373, ISSN 1053-8119
6.) Hartmann C, Triller A, Spehr M, Dittrich R, Hatt H, Buettner A. Sperm-Activating Odorous Substances in Human Follicular Fluid and Vaginal Secretion: Identification by Gas Chromatography–Olfactometry and Ca2 Imaging. Chempluschem 78: 695–702, 2013. doi:10.1002/cplu.201300008
7.) Ashti Baghaei, K. (2015). Large scale analysis of olfactory receptors with highly genetically variations in relation with specific anosmia (Doctoral dissertation, Bochum, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Diss., 2013).
8.) Roger Emter, Christel Merillat, Fiona Buchli, Felix Flachsmann, Andreas Natsch. Decoding human olfaction by high heterologous expression of odorant receptors detecting signature odorants. Current Biology, October 10, 2025
9.) Roger EmterAndreas Natsch Modified olfactory receptors WO2024126820A1