How An Andromeda Strain Might be Strained

An anonymous reader writes "For the world-record holder as the longest surviving bacteria in space [6 years, Bacillus subtillis], it turns out that among the multitude of dangers [cold, vacuum, UV, lack of nutrients, etc.] the greatest stress of all is intense ultraviolet radiation. In the next two years, new space station experiments are slated to test the panspermia hypothesis--also popularized in Robert Zubrin's "Entering Space", but dating back at least 150 years in the scientific literature. Recent balloon experiments, have rekindled alot of the controversy, but NASA Ames scientist, Rocco Mancinelli, concludes: "In my opinion, for a spore, it's quite likely.""

Comments

Why is this a surprise?

[slycer9]

It's been a long standing standard that one of the most effective antibacterial/antiviral measures one can take today is UV irradiation, it's one of the few things most movies even get correct. Hell, even most of the studies done about UV irradiation on humans in space is inconclusive. Or has all the hype in the past (Anti-Anthrax measures in post offices) been just optimistic public placating?

Lunar Colonists Were Returned To Earth...

[cybrpnk2]

Another prime example of bacterial space survival was found by Apollo 12 when it brought back parts of the unmanned Surveyor 3. Conrad's quote here has been censored, incidentally; his original quote was a little pithier...

Bacteria on the moon

[jeff_bond]

An interesting link about bacteria that was unintentionally left on the moon, and was later brought back to earth alive.

Jeff

Hostile space environment

[panurge]

Ever since thiobacter concretivorans was discovered chewing its way through concrete in nuclear reactors, we've known that life is not necessarily restricted to a temperature range of around 0-40C. (That's 32-104F for people who hate the French.) What with the stuff that grows in hot springs at 95C (work out yourselves), and the stuff that lives at the bottom of oceans, we shouldn't really be surprised if microorganisms can survive in space - after all, comets have plenty of ice and dirt, just like the Earth. And no matter how bad the UV, there is going to be somewhere on a comet or small asteroid that is shaded from direct solar radiation. Maybe I'm just being stupid, but to me the argument goes something like (and I may be repeating myself, if so sorry)

50% of the planets we've actually checked out are inhabited.

The other 50% have been visited by human beings who have left artefacts behind

So why do we expect the rest of the universe, including the non-large rocky bits,to be life-free?

I'd like to know...

[GeckoFood]

...is how said information would be useful to us, since we already know what stresses bacteria. I mean, are we looking for an advancement in medicine or something, that will, say, extend the shelf life of certain helpful cultures or anything like that? Or is this just for the pure science of it and the satisfation of having knowledge?

I don't care either way. It's interesting to follow stuff like this, but it makes it a lot more interesting for the spectator when one knows what the goal is...

Re:I'd like to know...

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Right now, the goal is just to know. That's it.

Eventually ... who the hell knows? We may learn something that will have direct medical applications. Or we just have more data to file away in the ever-increasing store of human knowledge, and a century or three from now someone will come along and say, "Hey, I can use this."

I'm all for applied scientific research (I ought to be, considering I work in biotech.) I'm also all for pure scientific research, since, a) more knowledge is never a bad thing -- yes, I will happily defend that statement against the "things man was not meant to know" crowd -- and b) most of the useful technology we have today was based on what was, at one time, pure science without any obvious application.

Benjamin Franklin watched the Montgolfier brothers' first balloon go up. When someone else asked him of what use he thought such a thing might be, he replied, "Of what possible use, sir, is a new-born babe?" Exactly.

Guess they haven't tested this one

[Anonymous Coward]

"Deinococcus radiodurans is the most radiation-resistant organism known. Deinococcus radiodurans were discovered in 1956 by Arthur W. Anderson at Oregon Agricultural Experiment Station in Corvallis. Among the many characteristics of Deinococcus radiodurans, a few of the most noteworthy include an extreme resistance to genotoxic chemicals, oxidative damage, high levels of ionizing and ultraviolet radiation, and dehydration. "
- http://deinococcus.allbio.org/

About Mars and dark sands

[Ektanoor]

Well this is not exactly about panspermias but it may be an interesting note about the possibility of life in outter Space.

I would risk to say that we may already have some evidence (not proof!) that something alive may thrive in Mars surface. Nearly two years ago I got hand in a frame where one could see both light and dark dunes among a rugged Mars landscape. It was interesting to note that dark dunes formed mostly opposite to the general pattern of winblow that could be inferred from light dunes and the erosive processes in mounds and cliffs. Besides, on several places, under certain mounds, one could see how "dark sands" covered one side in a weird manner. They would concentrate over the base of the mound's side and swiftly dissipate the farer they would be from the mound.

MSS scientist claimed that these pattern was the result of light dunes being "pertified" and that dark dunes being "active". However, in several places, one could be pretty sure that the light mounds were still very active, was they "cut" a dark dune with their edges. Moreover, in one section of this regon, dark dunes would always "hide" behind the bigger and larger light dunes.

In the whole, it seemed that dark dunes ran away from light and wind, what was quite weird. As the region presented lots of data on how wind acted, the pattern was clear and perfect.

On other section of Mars I saw an even more weird picture. There, dunes would have clear and well visible "bridges" between themselves - patches that united dunes well far away from each other. In one place, such "bridge" was rising over a mound, going down through a small cliff and uniting two dark dunes quite far apart from each other (maybe more than a few hundreds of meters).

These strange and weird dark dunes are a mistery in Mars, many of them are clear and pure dunes, only its dark pattern gets quite weird as they don't have a clear origin. However some places show dunes that are only slightly similar to natural dunes. They are more compact, smaller than light dunes, Besides they present a "water drop" pattern rather than presenting the usual crescent shape of most dunes.

This is not the only weird thing in Mars about "dark lands" There are many more. However this is the most widespread weird feature in the planet. One can see this from pole to pole. However they are not in every place. They are quite localized in certain regions, while others lack them completely.

Don't forget abiogenesis

[job0]

The hypotheses competing with panspermia is abiogenesis. Abiogeneis theorises that life can arise spontaneously from non-life molecules under proper conditions. I tend to favour abiogeneis slightly over panspermia simply because we know
that there is life on Earth, but we don't know if there is any elsewhere in the Universe.

The four steps to necessary for Abiogenesis are:

Inorganic Molecules to Organic Monomers

Organic Monomers to Organic Polymers

Formation of membranes from the polymers

Acquisition of a means of reproduction

Maybe the asteroids instead of seeding the earth provided the energy required for the first step.