Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42809013›Full record

ReviewJournal of chemical ecology2026

Odour Profiling for Animal Management and Behavioural Manipulation: An Overview of the Tools and Applications.

Ashlyn Austin, Adrian D Manning, Todd A Gillam, Anton Blencowe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of chemical ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ashlyn AustinApplied Chemistry and Translational Biomaterials (ACTB) Group, Centre for Pharmaceutical Innovation (CPI), School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia.
Adrian D ManningFenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia.
Todd A GillamApplied Chemistry and Translational Biomaterials (ACTB) Group, Centre for Pharmaceutical Innovation (CPI), School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia. todd.gillam@murdoch.edu.au.
Anton BlencoweApplied Chemistry and Translational Biomaterials (ACTB) Group, Centre for Pharmaceutical Innovation (CPI), School of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia. anton.blencowe@adelaide.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Olfaction plays a prominent role in the evolution of animal behaviour, facilitating both intraspecies and interspecies communication, and predator-prey interactions. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) underpin these odours, and their analysis is therefore central to characterising and replicating cues such as pheromones, allelochemicals, and other released signals used to attract, deter, or condition animal responses. Thus, this review aims to introduce the reader to the applications of animal odours in animal management and behavioural control, and to provide a critical, practice-oriented guide to selecting and combining VOC sampling and analytical techniques for animal odour studies. Animal odour profiling typically involves three steps: (1) sampling, (2) transfer to the instrument, and (3) detection/identification of VOCs. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) is the gold standard for VOC analysis, and is often paired with headspace techniques, including static headspace, dynamic headspace, and solid-phase microextraction (SPME) to facilitate sampling and transfer of VOCs. In addition, liquid and distillation-based extraction methods are discussed, which remain important for capturing less volatile or matrix-bound components in animal odour and semiochemical research. On the analytical side we discuss GC-MS alongside emerging and complementary techniques, including proton transfer reaction-mass spectrometry (PTR-MS), selected ion flow tube-mass spectrometry (SIFT-MS), gas chromatography-olfactometry (GC-O), and electronic noses, emphasising their respective strengths and limitations for qualitative and quantitative VOC analysis. Collectively, the literature shows that no single sampling or analytical approach is universally optimal. Effective animal odour profiling therefore requires matching extraction and detection strategies to the volatility, stability, and behavioural relevance of target VOCs. Careful consideration should also be given to how these methodological choices influence the odour profiles used in ecological, behavioural, and applied management contexts.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalOdorantsVolatile Organic CompoundsAnimalsGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometrySolid Phase MicroextractionVolatile Organic CompoundsAnalysis techniquesBehavioural manipulationEthologyOdour profilingSampling techniquesVolatile organic compounds

Identifiers

PMID42809013
PMCPMC13624044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.