. 2019 Oct 2;10:1267. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2019.01267

TABLE 1.

Compounds selected for functional studies with regard to their ability to act as agonists (or not) of the 25 TAS2R receptors identified in humans to date.

*hTAS2R*	1	3	4	5	7	8	9	10	13	14	16	19	20	30	31	38	39	40	41	42	43	45	46	50	60
Promiscuous agonists:
Diphenidol	100		100		10 and 675 ± 186^∗			30	30	10	100		100	100	3	100	100	30			30		30
Quinine			10 and 838 ± 24^∗∗		10 and 983 ± 257^∗			10		10					10		10	10			10		10
Denatonium			300			1000		3 and 120 ± 56	30					0.03 and 0.27 ± 0.06			100				300		30 and 240 ± 192
Partly selective agonists:
Colchicine			100 and 1025 ± 1219														3000						300 and 1580 ± 170
Chloroquine		10 and 172 ± 29			+/0^∗			10000									100
Dapsone			100					100										30
Strychnine					+/1000^∗			3 and 21.8 ± 7.5															0.1 and 0.43 ± 0.02
Saccharin						+									170 ± 10 and 1700 ± 20						80 ± 60 and 1100 ± 10
Sodium cromoglycate					3000 and 4500 ± 1600								10 and 45 ± 25								3000
Selective agonists:
Ofloxacin							EC₅₀ ≈ 200
Phenanthroline				100
Erythromycin								300
Carisoprodol										100

The most recent nomenclature was adopted (Andres-Barquin and Conte, 2004; Sainz et al., 2007; Dotson et al., 2008; Meyerhof et al., 2010; Alexander et al., 2011; Soares et al., 2013). Unless otherwise stated, single values (i.e., lacking ± SEM) represent the threshold concentration (i.e., the lowest concentration (μM) to have elicited a calcium response in transfected HEK-293T cells), whereas values presented as the mean ± SEM represent the EC₅₀ (μM) (Meyerhof et al., 2010). When both a threshold concentration and the EC₅₀ were available, both values were reported (in that order). When no quantitative indicators were available, the symbol “+” indicates agonism. The TAS2R numbers in bold type and those underlined correspond to the TAS2Rs found to be expressed in human LMs. The TAS2R numbers in italics correspond those not expressed in human LMs. The TAS2R numbers in standard type correspond to the receptors not assessed in RT-qPCR assays. ^∗ values from Liu et al. (2018) and ^∗∗ values from Jaggupilli et al. (2019).