2), but our analyses were not designed to quantify their expression levels. Thus, we proceeded to de-orphanize the newly cloned ORs with a panel of 90 compounds, including oviposition attractants, plant-derived kairomones, repellents from natural sources, and mosquito attractants. We subcloned CquiOR1, CquiOR44, CquiOR73, and CquiOR161 into pGEMHE, expressed them along with the obligatory co-receptor CquiOrco in Xenopus oocytes, and then click here performed electrophysiological recordings by subjecting oocytes to our panel of test compounds. CquiOR1·CquiOrco-expressing oocytes behaved

like a generic OR ( Fig. 3), i.e., an OR that does not have a specific ligand, but responds to multiple compounds. Albeit responses were small

in general, the strongest current amplitudes were recorded when CquiOR1 was challenged with 1-hexanol, 1-octen-3-ol, 2-phenoxyethanol, or benzaldehyde ( Fig. 3, Fig. 4). Likewise, CquiOR44 was activated by multiple odorants at low level, but interestingly the strongest responses were recorded when CquiOR44·CquiOrco-expressing oocytes were challenged with plant kairomones ( Fig. 3), including known natural repellents like p-menthane-3,8-diol ( www.selleckchem.com/products/AZD6244.html Paluch et al., 2010) and eucalyptol ( Omolo et al., 2004). The most active ligand was fenchone ( Fig. 4), but there was apparently no chiral discrimination as responses to (+)- and (−)-fenchone did not differ. When challenged with the same panel

of compounds CquiOR73·CquiOrco-expressing oocytes responded differently. Robust responses were seen with eugenol, smaller responses to phenolic compounds, particularly 4-methylphenol (Fig. 4), and no significant response to the majority of compounds in the panel, except for octyl acetate. Then, we repeated these experiments by focusing on phenolic compounds, including dimethylphenols Interleukin-2 receptor (Fig. 4). These experiments showed strong responses elicited by 3,5-dimethylphenol (Fig. 3), stronger than those generated by other phenolic compounds, including methylphenols, but eugenol was the best ligand identified for this OR (Fig. 4). Based on these experiments we concluded that CquiOR73 is an eugenol-detecting OR, but the significance of a receptor tuned to phenolic compounds remains an interesting topic for future research. It did not escape our attention, however, that eugenol has been identified as a plant-derived insect repellent (Kafle and Shih, 2013). Lastly, we attempted to de-orphanize CquiOR161, but in marked contrast to the above-mentioned ORs, it did not respond to any of the test compounds. Despite several attempts at the UC Davis laboratory, CquiOR161 remained silent.