1
|
Ramkissoon NK, Macey MC, Kucukkilic-Stephens E, Barton T, Steele A, Johnson DN, Stephens BP, Schwenzer SP, Pearson VK, Olsson-Francis K. Experimental Identification of Potential Martian Biosignatures in Open and Closed Systems. ASTROBIOLOGY 2024; 24:538-558. [PMID: 38648554 DOI: 10.1089/ast.2023.0013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/25/2024]
Abstract
NASA's Perseverance and ESA's Rosalind Franklin rovers have the scientific goal of searching for evidence of ancient life on Mars. Geochemical biosignatures that form because of microbe-mineral interactions could play a key role in achieving this, as they can be preserved for millions of years on Earth, and the same could be true for Mars. Previous laboratory experiments have explored the formation of biosignatures under closed systems, but these do not represent the open systems that are found in natural martian environments, such as channels and lakes. In this study, we have conducted environmental simulation experiments using a global regolith simulant (OUCM-1), a thermochemically modelled groundwater, and an anaerobic microbial community to explore the formation of geochemical biosignatures within plausible open and closed systems on Mars. This initial investigation showed differences in the diversity of the microbial community developed after 28 days. In an open-system simulation (flow-through experiment), the acetogenic Acetobacterium (49% relative abundance) and the sulfate reducer Desulfosporomusa (43% relative abundance) were the dominant genera. Whereas in the batch experiment, the sulfate reducers Desulfovibrio, Desulfomicrobium, and Desulfuromonas (95% relative abundance in total) were dominant. We also found evidence of enhanced mineral dissolution within the flow-through experiment, but there was little evidence of secondary deposits in the presence of biota. In contrast, SiO2 and Fe deposits formed within the batch experiment with biota but not under abiotic conditions. The results from these initial experiments indicate that different geochemical biosignatures can be generated between open and closed systems, and therefore, biosignature formation in open systems warrants further investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Michael C Macey
- AstrobiologyOU, STEM Faculty, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | | | - Timothy Barton
- AstrobiologyOU, STEM Faculty, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | - Andrew Steele
- Earth and Planetary Laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC, USA
| | - David N Johnson
- AstrobiologyOU, STEM Faculty, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | - Ben P Stephens
- AstrobiologyOU, STEM Faculty, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Neveu M, Quinn R, Barge LM, Craft KL, German CR, Getty S, Glein C, Parra M, Burton AS, Cary F, Corpolongo A, Fifer L, Gangidine A, Gentry D, Georgiou CD, Haddadin Z, Herbold C, Inaba A, Jordan SF, Kalucha H, Klier P, Knicely K, Li AY, McNally P, Millan M, Naz N, Raj CG, Schroedl P, Timm J, Yang Z. Future of the Search for Life: Workshop Report. ASTROBIOLOGY 2024; 24:114-129. [PMID: 38227837 DOI: 10.1089/ast.2022.0158] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/18/2024]
Abstract
The 2-week, virtual Future of the Search for Life science and engineering workshop brought together more than 100 scientists, engineers, and technologists in March and April 2022 to provide their expert opinion on the interconnections between life-detection science and technology. Participants identified the advances in measurement and sampling technologies they believed to be necessary to perform in situ searches for life elsewhere in our Solar System, 20 years or more in the future. Among suggested measurements for these searches, those pertaining to three potential indicators of life termed "dynamic disequilibrium," "catalysis," and "informational polymers" were identified as particularly promising avenues for further exploration. For these three indicators, small breakout groups of participants identified measurement needs and knowledge gaps, along with corresponding constraints on sample handling (acquisition and processing) approaches for a variety of environments on Enceladus, Europa, Mars, and Titan. Despite the diversity of these environments, sample processing approaches all tend to be more complex than those that have been implemented on missions or envisioned for mission concepts to date. The approaches considered by workshop breakout groups progress from nondestructive to destructive measurement techniques, and most involve the need for fluid (especially liquid) sample processing. Sample processing needs were identified as technology gaps. These gaps include technology and associated sampling strategies that allow the preservation of the thermal, mechanical, and chemical integrity of the samples upon acquisition; and to optimize the sample information obtained by operating suites of instruments on common samples. Crucially, the interplay between science-driven life-detection strategies and their technological implementation highlights the need for an unprecedented level of payload integration and extensive collaboration between scientists and engineers, starting from concept formulation through mission deployment of life-detection instruments and sample processing systems.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marc Neveu
- Department of Astronomy, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland, USA
- NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
| | - Richard Quinn
- NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
| | - Laura M Barge
- NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA
| | - Kathleen L Craft
- Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University, Laurel, Maryland, USA
| | | | | | | | - Macarena Parra
- NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
| | | | - Francesca Cary
- Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawai'i, Mānoa, Hawaii, USA
| | - Andrea Corpolongo
- Department of Geosciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Lucas Fifer
- Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Andrew Gangidine
- Office of Development, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, USA
| | - Diana Gentry
- NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
| | | | - Zaid Haddadin
- Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of California, San Diego, California, USA
| | - Craig Herbold
- School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Aila Inaba
- Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Seán F Jordan
- School of Chemical Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Hemani Kalucha
- Division of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, USA
| | - Pavel Klier
- NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California, USA
- NASA Postdoctoral Program, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USA
| | - Kas Knicely
- Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA
| | - An Y Li
- Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA
| | - Patrick McNally
- Space Physics Research Laboratory, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| | - Maëva Millan
- Laboratory Atmosphere and Space Observations, Guyancourt, France
| | - Neveda Naz
- Department of Chemistry, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Chinmayee Govinda Raj
- School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Peter Schroedl
- Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Jennifer Timm
- Department of Biochemistry and Microbiology, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USA
| | - Ziming Yang
- Department of Chemistry, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|