New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Cat Noses Contain Twisted Labyrinths That Help Them Separate Smells

Scientists hypothesize that coiled channels inside a cat’s nose may function like a gas chromatograph

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When it comes to a keen sense of smell, dogs get all the glory. But cats have a pretty well-developed sniffer, too—and a new study may explain how it works.

Researchers created a computational model of a cat’s nose based on computed tomography scans and tissue slices from a deceased house cat whose body was donated for research. When a cat takes a sniff, airflow is diverted into two different streams for breathing and smelling. The model showed that the animal’s nasal passages then direct the smelling stream through an extensive network of tightly coiled, sensor-studded channels called turbinates. The scientists hypothesize that this structure may function like a gas chromatograph—a sophisticated chemical device that separates different compounds based on their solubility. Scents that dissolve less easily in nasal mucus travel farther than more readily dissolved ones and therefore bind to more distant smell receptors.

“We know that animals—including cats—use a sense of smell for detection of food, for sense of danger and also for kin recognition,” says Kai Zhao, a bioengineer in the department of otolaryngology at the Ohio State University and senior author of the study. The coiled structure the researchers documented is more than 100 times more efficient than the straight channel found in the noses of amphibians and some mammals, and it can fit more smell receptors in a confined head space, Zhao notes. The study was published on Thursday in PLOS Computational Biology and was partially funded by Mars Petcare UK, a company that manufactures pet food.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


“What they show is that this turbinate structure seems to be very highly complex in cats, compared to other species of mammals,” says Luis Saraiva, a smell neuroscientist at Sidra Medicine in Qatar, who was not involved with the study. The most surprising part, he adds, is that cats “have a lot more of those turbinates, compared to rats or humans.”

This is not the first time the gas chromatograph analogy has been used for nasal anatomy. The idea was initially proposed in the 1960s, but most of the studies that explored it were in amphibians, which have a much simpler nasal structure. Previous investigations have shown that other exquisite smellers, including dogs, rats and bobcats, have a nose with coiled turbinates, but the new paper is the first to study the arrangement in house cats and extend the gas chromatograph analogy to mammals.

Cats’ nasal sensitivity might also explain why they make the characteristic “stinky face” when they smell something unpleasant. Like humans smelling milk that has gone off, they may be trying to close up their nasal passages to avoid inhaling the scent too deeply, Saraiva speculates.

“The next big step is trying to link computational studies like this with real physiological studies in animals,” says Tom Eiting, a physiologistat Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine who has studied olfaction in bats and wasn’t involved in the new paper. Ultimately, he says, researchers hope to map the solubility of various scents to the locations of specific smell receptors in cats’ noses.

The complexity of the animals’ nasal structure underscores how sophisticated their sense of smell is. But don’t expect them to replace dogs as bomb sniffers anytime soon. “Cats are very difficult to train,” Zhao says.

Tanya Lewis was formerly senior desk editor for health and medicine at Scientific American. She wrote and edited stories for the website and print magazine on topics ranging from COVID to organ transplants. She also appeared on Scientific American’s podcast Science Quickly and wrote Scientific American’s weekly Health & Medicine newsletter. She held a number of positions over her nearly 10 years at Scientific American, including health editor, assistant news editor and associate editor at Scientific American Mind. Previously, she has written for outlets that include Insider, Wired, Science News and others. She has a degree in biomedical engineering from Brown University and one in science communication from the University of California, Santa Cruz. Follow her on Bluesky @tanyalewis.bsky.social

More by Tanya Lewis

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe