DOM-AT
chemical compound
DOM-AT, or DOMAT, also known as 5,8-dimethoxy-6-methyl-2-aminotetralin, is a cyclized phenethylamine and 2-aminotetralin related to the psychedelic amphetamine DOM. It is specifically the cyclized 2-aminotetralin analogue of DOM.
The compound has been found to be a more potent agonist of peripheral serotonin receptors than DOM in vitro. This activity was blocked by the serotonin receptor antagonist cinanserin and by the non-hallucinogenic serotonin receptor modulator 2-bromo-LSD (BOL-148). However, DOM-AT was not tested for hallucinogen-type activity in animals or humans in these studies. Subsequently, DOM-AT did not appear to show a typical hallucinogen-like profile in behavioral tests in rats (e.g., the conditioned avoidance response test). In cats, DOM-AT produced a rage reaction, while in rabbits, it produced behavioral excitation and hyperthermia. In later research, DOM-AT failed to substitute for LSD in rodent drug discrimination tests, whereas the related cyclized 2-aminoindan compound DOM-AI was effective, albeit with far lower potency than DOM (approximately 1/15th). Based on these findings, DOM-AT has been deemed inactive in terms of hallucinogen-like activity and unlikely to be psychedelic in humans.
DOM-AT was first described in the scientific literature by David E. Nichols in 1973.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “DOM-AT” as chemical compound. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the science & nature register because the source frames it as chemical compound. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q82951153. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1973.
A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “DOM-AT”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow DOM-AT primary sources, DOM-AT archive and DOM-AT research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “DOM-AT”?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
- Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “DOM-AT” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.