The retrieved IRC logs from the hplusroadmap channel contain extensive discussions on olfaction, olfactory receptors (ORs), perception of smells, genetic engineering of olfactory systems, comparisons across species, potential enhancements via stem cells or synthetic biology, and speculative applications like brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) or designer perfumes. These conversations blend esoteric research speculation, paper sharing, and engineering ideas, often involving genetic modifications, G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), and evolutionary biology. The logs do not provide a single definitive “answer” to the query but offer fragmented, technical brainstorming suitable for researchers in neuroscience, synthetic biology, and bioengineering.
Discussions highlight challenges like human olfactory variability (e.g., 30% differences in OR genes across individuals), myths about inferior human smell, and opportunities for enhancement (e.g., via Kv1.3 knockout or elephant OR genes). Engineering ideas include recombinase-driven receptor diversity, intranasal stem cell delivery, and DREADD-based designer receptors. No logs indicate direct criminal intent; content focuses on speculative tech development.
Discussions reference cryo-EM structures of human ORs and mechanistic details of odorant binding, emphasizing GPCRs’ role in combinatorial activation.
https://gnusha.org/2023-03-15.log
nmz787> https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1064664282450628710/1085671598767489175/image.png
nmz787> from http://web.eecs.umich.edu/~peicheng/teaching/EECS598_06_Winter/Lecture%2016%20-%20Mar%2009.pdf
too many lenses
nmz787> haha
nmz787> care of Nikon, 1998
“Structural basis of odorant recognition by a human odorant receptor” https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05798-y
This excerpt shares a structural paper on human OR binding, noting ~400 ORs in the genome enable vast odor space navigation.
https://gnusha.org/2023-03-15.log
“Structural basis of odorant recognition by a human odorant receptor” https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-05798-y
“Our sense of smell enables us to navigate a vast space of chemically diverse odour molecules. This task is accomplished by the combinatorial activation of approximately 400 odorant G protein-coupled receptors encoded in the human genome1,2,3. How odorants are recognized by odorant receptors remains unclear. Here we provide mechanistic insight into how an odorant binds to a human odorant …
…receptor.”
nmz787> like 15 years ago I think I had some idea about gpcr discovery
nmz787> I can’t recall what it was now
Speculation on GPCR discovery ties into historical ideas for OR engineering.
Logs speculate on replacing human OR genes with animal variants (e.g., elephant for better detection), Kv1.3 knockouts for hypersensitivity, and recombinase circuits for lifelong receptor diversity. Human “super sniffers” like Joy Milne (Parkinson’s detection) are cited.
https://gnusha.org/2025-09-15.log
kanzure> “A principal odor map unifies diverse tasks in olfactory perception” https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ade4401 odor prediction (2023)
somehow i’ve read this paper before
kanzure> olfactory section of genetic-modifications.mdwn is lacking.
kanzure> “Kv1.3−/− mice have a 1,000- to 10,000-fold lower threshold for detection of odors and an increased ability to discriminate between odorants” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2737549/
i’m not sure i’d want to curse my children with this
Enhancing sensitivity via genetics; ethical notes on heritability.
https://gnusha.org/2017-09-01.log
alright so airflow is important in canine and that explains their olfactory senses, somewhat. (other component is neuronal density). you can still replace human olfactory receptor genes with elephant olfactory genes or whatever you want, in the mean time. not that it’s a good idea or worth doing.. just saying it’s possible.
if you were into perfumes, then you could propose a product like this: snort some engineered neural stem cells into your nasal cavity, have them pre-programmed to die after 4 months, each neural stem cell should be programmed to have designer receptors exclusively activated by designer drugs (DREADDs) (or designer perfumes etc). this seems something that jcorgan would be interested in.
Proposal for temporary, intranasal DREADD-based ORs; mentions jcorgan (likely a channel user interested in neuroengineering).
https://gnusha.org/2025-09-15.log
kanzure> my plan: “develop a recombinase-driven genetic circuit that enables olfactory sensory neurons to stochastically assemble novel olfactory receptor variants from modular gene segment, analogous to immune V(D)J recombination. make a biologically plausible strategy to generate in vivo receptor diversity and systematically enhancing odor sensitivity and selectivity.”
Speculative engineering for dynamic OR evolution, inspired by immune recombination.
https://gnusha.org/2023-01-16.log
all the people i’ve asked to smell my sucralose powder noticed they have sweetness receptors deep in their noses
(well that’d be >10 russians)
i have never quite figured out L29Ah’s profession but perhaps better to not ask
i think experimenting on humans is his hobby
kanzure: i have no formal education beyond the high school
“Cell-based therapy restores olfactory function in an inducible model of hyposmia” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213671119301468
“Isolating nasal olfactory stem cells from rodents or humans” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3217619/
Anecdotal sweetness detection in noses; stem cell therapies for hyposmia restoration. L29Ah noted as human experimenter.
https://gnusha.org/2023-01-16.log
if you snort enough canine olfactory stem cells would your sense of smell change
you’d suddenly find fire hydrants very interesting
cool
how is it that mice have a better sense of smell than humans? it must be beneficial for humans to have a reduced sense of smell?
or odor spectrum did not confer enough of an advantage to really matter
compared to other traits
oh so maybe we can breed super sniffer humans
of course it would really suck to be one, with all the chemical perfume nonsense out there
and maybe protocols for using smell for chemical analysis
there are some human super sniffers like smelly cancer lady
Speculation on canine stem cells for enhanced smell; evolutionary trade-offs; Joy Milne (“smelly cancer lady”) as super sniffer example.
Human OR pseudogenes (~50% non-functional) lead to variability; logs debunk 19th-century myths of human olfactory inferiority. Breathing synchrony and mucus diffusion discussed.
https://gnusha.org/2017-09-01.log
“number of olfactory receptor genes by species: cow 1186, opossum 1188, rat 1207, elephant 1948,”
.wik olfactory receptor
“Olfactory receptors (ORs), also known as odorant receptors, are expressed in the cell membranes of olfactory receptor neurons and are responsible for the detection of odorants (i.e., compounds that have an odor) which give rise to the sense of smell.” — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olfactory_receptor
“… In this view, a decrease in the fraction of functional OR genes would cause a reduction in the sense of smell; species with higher pseudogene count would also have a decreased olfactory ability. This assumption is flawed. Dogs, which are reputed to have good sense of smell,[40] do not have the largest number of functional OR genes.[38]”
Cross-species OR gene counts; notes dogs’ smell isn’t solely due to OR numbers (airflow/neuronal density matter more).
https://gnusha.org/2023-01-16.log
do humans even have a universal shared set of smell responses? colors are the result of shared color receptor sensitivity to a specific wavelength range; is there something like that where most people have the same set of smell receptors that respond to the same stimulus the same way?
“Any two people, on average, will have functional differences in over 30 percent of their odorant receptor genes, a 2013 study found. Which explains why some people might find some smells pungent or pleasant that the next person can’t even detect.”
fenn: why would you think they don’t?
“there’s no accounting for taste”
because it would explain why there’s not a shared language for smells
all the people i’ve asked to smell my sucralose powder noticed they have sweetness receptors deep in their noses
(well that’d be >10 russians)
Variability in OR genes explains perceptual differences; lack of smell “language” due to no universal responses.
https://gnusha.org/2023-01-16.log
but this one argues that humans are suffering from a false olfactory inferiority complex https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/you-actually-smell-better-dog-180963391/
“Poor human olfaction is a 19th century myth” https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aam7263
http://erewhon.superkuh.com/pictures/table-of-organic-compounds-and-their-smells2.jpg
re: oleic
There is a trend towards wax/nut at the end of the column but it ends at 15 and oleic is 18.
Debunks Broca/Freud-era myths; olfactory bulb size doesn’t predict ability.
https://gnusha.org/2025-09-15.log
a lot of the things we smell are actually reaction products catalyzed by the material, or bacteria that live on it, or something like that
kanzure> anyway, we don’t need to be stuck with the genomically encoded olfactory receptors. we can have background level of recombination creating new receptors with new detection throughout life.
size controls how quickly molecules can diffuse through mucus, and i guess the mucus is designed so that viruses can’t attach to the cells secreting the mucus
kanzure> “you smell like HIV” looool
kanzure> “got that herpes simplex smell”
it would be better to have a separate smell organ that isn’t hooked directly into all this low level stuff (ask me how i know)
just another sense channel for the cortex
the majority of modern humans have really saturated dulled noses from all the chemicals, and probably a lack of folate
Olfaction as indirect (reaction products/bacteria); mucus diffusion; modern dulling from chemicals/folate deficiency; proposal for isolated smell organ.
Logs explore olfaction as BCI input, gas chromatography analogies, and why electrical stimulation fails to evoke smells (non-specific activation).
https://gnusha.org/2017-09-01.log
yeah, I don’t know much about the nose, but I always thought smelling worked like gas chromatography, i.e. the sudden exposure to a substance near the nose, would reach different receptors at different times depending on the diffusion speed of the substance
so a simple constant/random stimulation of a couple of these sensors shouldn’t produce a smell at all
i.e. from a hypothetical no smelly substance situation to a specific substance situation, the deeper receptors would fire later, and the time,depth profile of receptor activations may match a smell
as a BCI, this could potentially be interesting
(when you hold your breath, you hardly perceive new smells, so we only actually smell the change in smells, and our brain integrates it somewhat over time)
possibly the smell analysis part of the brain must be connected with the breathing part of the brain, in order to compensate signals with inhalation speed
Olfaction modeled as temporal chromatography; potential for high-resolution BCI via differential activation.
https://gnusha.org/2017-09-01.log
“Finally, electrical stimulation of olfactory sensory neurons may be technically simple because these neurons are in fact quite accessible in the human nose. This accessibility has allowed for live biopsies of these neurons (Feron et al. 1998; Leopold et al. 2000; Rawson and Ozdener 2013), and for recording odorant-induced local field potentials directly from the epithelial surface of …
…subjects who concurrently reported olfactory perception (Hummel et al. 1996; Lapid et al. 2009, 2011; Lapid and Hummel 2013).”
“A natural odorant likely activates specific subsets of olfactory sensory neurons as a reflection of the receptor subtypes they express (Firestein 2001). Moreover, natural odorants may excite some receptors while inhibiting others (Duchamp-Viret et al. 1999; Delay and Restrepo 2004; Su et al. 2011), and it is this fine interplay that characterizes a given odorant. In contrast, our stimulation …
…likely indiscriminately influenced large populations of these cells, populations never activated in concert by natural stimuli. Such activation patterns are likely not recognized as odor by the olfactory system.”
Why macro-electrodes fail: non-specific activation disrupts combinatorial coding.
Proposals for “smell-aids” (nasal plugs/clips), biomimetic sniffers, and animal-derived sensors (e.g., Neuralink in olfactory bulbs).
https://gnusha.org/2025-09-15.log
“smell-aids” https://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-025-03999-y “We attempt to invent “Smell-Aids” by non-invasively enhancing intranasal odorant delivery to the olfactory epithelium, using two prototypes: (a) a nasal foam plug with a diagonal channel embedded to direct air/odor flow upwards to the olfactory region; (b) a clip (similar to what synchronized swimmers …
…use) pinching a critical nasal valve region that may intensify the nasal airflow vortex to the olfactory region."
https://www.rayallen.com/k9-power-wake-scent-cone-training-system/
what…
it’s just a fan to blow some smelly stuff at the dogs (not a mask)
Non-invasive aids to boost odor flux; K9 training tools.
https://gnusha.org/2025-07-02.log
uhhh did anything ever come of the neuralink olfactory bulb implant demo? pretty sure that is the highest bandwidth, highest molecular-target-discriminator molecular sensor device we have ever created. dogs are supposed to discriminate between millions of odors or something, pretty sure pigs are similar.
“1/8 of a dog’s brain is devoted to analyzing smells” “canine olfactory bulb is 40x larger than in humans (relative to total brain size)”
“A bloodhound can detect 1 part per 10 trillion, roughly equivalent to detecting a single drop of blood diluted in 20 Olympic-sized swimming pools.”
“German Shepherds have been trained to detect explosives at 1–2 parts per billion”
Neuralink for decoupling animal olfaction from behavior; detection limits (ppt for bloodhounds).
https://gnusha.org/2022-07-20.log
[8] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3872745/
https://koniku.com/ “Our smell cyborgs are capable of autonomously and intelligently reading the air. We engineer proteins in biological neurons to create precise protein particle interactions. The biological cells function as sensors, amplifiers and biological signal processors.”
ok there’s not much on the website. it’s a chip with 640 electrodes and 128 “active” neurons, and 50,000 “hidden” neurons, and they’re using them as smell sensors
seems like they’re going for general brain computer interfaces, and this is a minimum viable product
I wonder how far they are
Koniku’s biochip for odor sensing (640 electrodes, neuronal cultures).
A comprehensive list of papers cited in the logs, grouped by theme. These inform discussions on OR structure, genetics, perception, and engineering. DOIs/PMIDs provided where available.
Full list exceeds 50; logs reference ~100 papers, many on GPCRs, stem cells, and insect olfaction (e.g., ant ORs).
These entities represent ventures in bioengineered olfaction, from chips to gene therapies. Logs speculate on scalability (e.g., intranasal stem cells) but note challenges like specificity and ethics. For deeper engineering, explore recombinase-V(D)J analogies or DREADD integration.
