Cited by 148Olfactory and Sensory Function StudiesIon Channels and ReceptorsBiochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques

A family of non-GPCR chemosensors defines an alternative logic for mammalian olfaction

Open access
Greer, Paul L., Bear, Daniel M., Lassance, Jean-Marc, Bloom, Maria Lissitsyna, Tsukahara, Tatsuya, Pashkovski, Stan L., Masuda, Francis Kei, Nowlan, Alexandra C. +3 more·2016·Cell

Abstract

Odor perception in mammals is mediated by parallel sensory pathways that convey distinct information about the olfactory world. Multiple olfactory subsystems express characteristic seven-transmembrane G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) in a one-receptor-per-neuron pattern that facilitates odor discrimination. Sensory neurons of the "necklace" subsystem are nestled within the recesses of the olfactory epithelium and detect diverse odorants; however, they do not express known GPCR odor receptors. Here, we report that members of the four-pass transmembrane MS4A protein family are chemosensors expressed within necklace sensory neurons. These receptors localize to sensory endings and confer responses to ethologically relevant ligands, including pheromones and fatty acids, in vitro and in vivo. Individual necklace neurons co-express many MS4A proteins and are activated by multiple MS4A ligands; this pooling of information suggests that the necklace is organized more like subsystems for taste than for smell. The MS4As therefore define a distinct mechanism and functional logic for mammalian olfaction.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cell.2016.05.001

Cites

70 of 70 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cells exposed to CD200 and CX3CL1 responded differentially to fAβ, increasing expression of genes involved in neuronal cell surface motif recognition or phagocytosis of CNS substrates, including MS4A genes, TREM2, TYROBP, CD33, and ABCA7.

    “Whereas cells exposed to these two factors responded differentially to fAβ, increasing expression of genes involved in neuronal cell surface motif recognition, or phagocytosis of CNS substrates, including MS4A genes, TREM2, TYROBP, CD33, and ABCA7 (Bradshaw et al., 2013; Fu et al., 2016; Greer et al., 2016)(Figure S6B).”

    From iPSC-derived human microglia-like cells to study neurological diseases (2017) · cites this paper as Greer et al., 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. van Giesen L Hernandez-Nunez L Delasoie-Baranek S Colombo M Renaud P Bruggmann R Benton R Samuel AD Sprecher SG Multimodal stimulus coding by a gustatory sensory neuron in Drosophila larvae. Nat Commun 2016 7 10687 26864722 PMC4753250

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Greer, P. L., Bear, D. M., Lassance, J.-M., Bloom, M. L., Tsukahara, T., Pashkovski, S. L., Masuda, F. K., Nowlan, A. C., Kirchner, R., Hoekstra, H. E., & Datta, S. R.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Datta, Sandeep Robert
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-06
Volume
165
Issue
7
Pages
1734-1748
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2406818379
Cited by
148
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 3
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • ORBi (University of Liège) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  • Belgian American Educational Foundation
  • McKnight Foundation (DP2OD007109, RO11DC011558)
  • Vallee Foundation
  • Astellas Pharma
  • Astellas Foundation for Research on Metabolic Disorders
  • National Institutes of Health (1dp2od007109-01)
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (F31DA036922)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (R01DC011558)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Olfactory and Sensory Function Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Sensory Systems › Ion Channels and Receptors
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Biochemical Analysis and Sensing Techniques
Keywords
olfactory sensory neurons, mammalian olfaction, pheromone detection, fatty acid detection, olfaction
MeSH terms
Animals, Membrane Proteins, Nerve Tissue Proteins, Odorants, Phylogeny, Smell, Olfactory Receptor Neurons, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review