## 1 Summary  
Research studies have identified several volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the urine and feces of domestic cat species [1; 2; 3]. However, there is no report on volatile compounds from cat urine contaminated carpet material over time. About 25% of U.S. households own a cat as a pet [4], and carpet contributes to approximately 48% of the U.S. total flooring market [5]. In addition to cat urine odor, new carpet materials can also contribute to the indoor VOCs and the health and odor issues generated [6]. Thus, investigation and identification of the types of volatile compounds emittedfrom cat urine contaminated carpet material over time are noteworthy. Figure 1 illustrates a few of many ways for humans to be exposed to cat urine or feces when they are deposited on carpet. [PERSON] et al. (2005) reported that in office building carpets, bacterial concentrations ranged from \(0.73\)-\(185\times 10^{5}\) CFU:g\({}^{-1}\), with \(7.28\times 10^{5}\) CFU:g\({}^{-1}\) as the median value. _Microoccus luteus_ was among the most commonly isolated microorganisms ([PERSON], 2017). Therefore, _M. luteus_ was selected to represent microbes commonly found on household surfaces that might interact with cat urine. Solid-phase microextraction (SPME), used to extract the VOCs in this study, is a non-invasive, solventless sampling method to extract and characterize volatiles from a source at trace levels ([PERSON] et al., 2005; [PERSON] et al., 2005; [PERSON] et al., 2005; [PERSON] et al., 2005; [PERSON] et al., 2005).  
The objective of this study was to report on VOCs emitted from cat urine contaminated carpet materials, followed by pet odor-controlling cleaning product treatment impacts on those carpet VOCs over time. The analyses were carried out with the assistance of simultaneous chemical and sensory analysis using SPME and multidimensional GC-MS-olfactometry (GC-MS-O). The data presented in the supplementary material can be used to evaluate and assess the indoor air quality in the presence of cat urine contaminated carpet-subflooring over time. The data also contains useful data on the efficacy of four different marketed products that claim to remove cat urine odor from a carpet on the application day and 15 days after application to the carpet.  
The key observations are:  
1. The cat urine and urine and _M. luteus_ treated carpet + subfloorings emitted malodors on day 0 (Table S1). However, the passage of time, aging of the urine, and _M. luteus_ treated carpet + subflooring caused the emergence of additional malodors described as strong 'fishy' (most likely trimethylamine) and'moldy' (most likely 3-octanone).
2. The strong mold-like smell was observed by directly smelling the 15-day aged urine and _M. luteus_ treated carpet samples. The 3-octanone's'mushroom- or'mold-like' smell was also detected by using a MS detector for _M. luteus_-urine contaminated test carpet samples (Table S2).
3. On day 0, all four cleaning products treated test carpet + subflooring + urine + _M. luteus_ had a profound 'fresh' and 'camphorous' smell when smelled with a human nose, and this observation was supported by the simultaneous chemical sensory analyses via GC-MS-O (Table S3). With the passage of time, the product-treated carpet had a less prominent 'fresh' 'camphorous' smell (Table S4). Also, the 'fish-like' and'mold-like' odors emerged from the cleaning product-treated carpet + subflooring materials.  
Figure 1: Schematic diagram showing the pathway of odorous compounds being emitted from cat excretes deposited carpet to a human nose in a domestic environment.