'Brain Aided' Musk Design

• Published in: Chemistry & biodiversity Vol. 1; no. 12; pp. 1957 - 1974
• Main Author: Kraft, Philip
• Format: Journal Article Conference Proceeding
• Language: English
• Published: Zürich WILEY-VCH Verlag 01-12-2004; WILEY‐VCH Verlag
• Subjects: Animals; Brain - metabolism; England; Fatty Acids, Monounsaturated - chemical synthesis; Fatty Acids, Monounsaturated - chemistry; Fatty Acids, Monounsaturated - isolation & purification; Humans; Odorants - analysis
• ISSN: 1612-1872; 1612-1880
• DOI: 10.1002/cbdv.200490150

This brief review, including new experimental results, is the summary of a talk at the RSC/SCI conference flavours & fragrances 2004 in Manchester, United Kingdom, 12–14 May, 2004. Musk odorants have been a classical domain for computer aided structure–odor relationship (SOR) studies, but, contrary to sandalwood or amber odorants, they belong to structurally very different substance classes, e.g., macrocycles, aromatic polycycles, and nitro arenes. Most SOR computer models are restricted to one class, excluding structural diversity to increase predictability. But even within a musk family, structural similarities are often due to a common synthetic access, and do not reflect binding requirements for the musk receptor. Beyond that, the importance of structural key features can be missed, which is discussed on the example of the (4S)‐Me group of Galaxolide®. By synthesis and olfactory evaluation of Galaxolide®‐like shaped macrobicycles as model compounds for conformationally constrained (12R)‐12‐methyltridecano‐13‐lactone, it was investigated how likely there is more than one musk receptor. Finally, the new family of so‐called linear musks is discussed, especially with respect to the conformational importance of the gem‐2′,2′‐dimethyl moiety in Helvetolide® and the additional 2′‐carbonyl group of Romandolide – structural features that strongly diminish the musk odor of macrocycles. On the example of 2‐methyl‐2‐[(E)‐1,2,4‐trimethylpent‐2‐enyloxy]propyl esters, the ‘brain‐aided’ design and conformational analysis of musk odorants is illustrated. The overview concludes with the synthesis, odor evaluation, and conformational discussion of the new musk odorant 2‐(3,3‐dimethylcyclohexyl)propanoic acid ethoxycarbonylmethyl ester.