Extreme Shrimp May Hold Clues To Alien Life On Europa

HughPickens.com writes: Scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory are studying a mysterious ecosystem at one of the world's deepest undersea hydrothermal vents to get clues about what life could be like on other planetary bodies, such as Jupiter's icy moon Europa, which has a subsurface ocean. At the vents, tiny shrimp are piled on top of each other, layer upon layer, crawling on rock chimneys that spew hot water. "You go along the ocean bottom and there's nothing, effectively," says Max Coleman. "And then suddenly we get these hydrothermal vents and a massive ecosystem. It's just literally teeming with life." Bacteria, inside the shrimps' mouths and in specially evolved gill covers, produce organic matter that feed the crustaceans. The particular bacteria in the vents are able to survive in extreme environments because of chemosynthesis, a process that works in the absence of sunlight and involves organisms getting energy from chemical reactions. In this case, the bacteria use hydrogen sulfide, a chemical abundant at the vents, to make organic matter. The temperatures at the vents can climb up to a scorching 842 degrees Fahrenheit (450 degrees Celsius), but waters just an inch away are cool enough to support the shrimp. The shrimp are blind, but have thermal receptors in the backs of their heads.

According to the exobiologists, these mysterious shrimps and its symbiotic bacterium may hold clues "about what life could be like on other planetary bodies." It's life that may be similar—at the basic level—to what could be lurking in the oceans of Europa, deep under the icy crust of the Jupiter moon. According to Emma Versteegh "whether an animal like this could exist on Europa heavily depends on the actual amount of energy that's released there, through hydrothermal vents." Nobody is seriously planning a landing mission on Europa yet. But the European Space Agency aims to launch its JUpiter ICy moons Explorer mission (JUICE) to make the first thickness measurements of Europa's icy crust starting in 2030 and NASA also has begun planning a Europa Clipper mission that would study the icy moon while doing flybys in a Jupiter orbit.

Comments

In Reverse

[Mr D from 63]

I find it much more probable that life begins in milder, friendlier conditions and then adapts over time to harsher environments. Of course, everything is relative.

Re:In Reverse

[inflamed]

I find it much more probable that life begins in milder, friendlier conditions and then adapts over time to harsher environments. Of course, everything is relative.

Ah, but mild and friendly is a relative term. I'm not sure our frame of reference is a valid example of mild and friendly...

Re:In Reverse

[SourceFrog]

It does seem more "intuitive", however, scientific research continually reveals findings that run contrary to our intuition; we don't actually know enough about the mechanisms for the genesis of life to actually say one way or the other if this is true. What you have is a hypothesis - one that needs more research - this is actually an interesting area of active research. Perhaps "harsh" environments are exactly what's needed to create sufficient 'chemical turmoil' and the driving selection mechanisms.

I actually suspect that the majority of life - and intelligent life - in the universe is probably ocean-based. If ever space aliens visit us, unlike the movies, I suspect their spaceships may be more likely to be like sealed aquariums than an air-breathing setup. I've never seen this idea reflected in science fiction though.

I think it may also partly explain why we haven't seen evidence of other intelligent life (so-called Fermi paradox, though I place little stock in that "paradox") - it's probably more difficult for ocean-based alien civilizations to have space programs.

Re:In Reverse

[pr0nbot]

Surely "mild" and "harsh" are subjective? From the point of view of a molecule, what constitutes "harsh"?

Perhaps evolving life in high temperatures turns out to be easier than at room temperature, e.g. because there's more free energy around.

Re:In Reverse

[wonkey_monkey]

In Reverse

In reverse of what? I didn't see anything in any of the articles or the summary about life starting out in these harsh environments.

That might have been the case on Earth, but there may not be any less harsh environments on Europa.

Re: In Reverse

[K. S. Kyosuke]

I'm not a biologist, but it seems to me that life is more keen to utilize energy through more complicated but well defined pathways rather than through unpredictable thermal excitations, much like your car prefers a piston engine and a gearbox to Orion-style detonations.

Re:In Reverse

[Brett Buck]

In this case I would say it was pretty sure that's what happened, but only because it was already alone.

I would expect life would flourish where the exploitable energy exists, and be more diverse where there is more of it.

Re: In Reverse

[itzly]

The earliest life forms probably didn't have complicated pathways.

Re:In Reverse

[SourceFrog]

Huh wtf? I'm just saying it's much more of an engineering challenge to launch rockets into space if you're an underwater species than a land-dwelling species - that's a plain straightforward fact, there is nothing even controversial about such a statement. Did you reply to the wrong comment? Nothing you said makes any sense as a reply to what I wrote. Or am I feeding a troll? Yeah, more likely.

Re:In Reverse

[Polybius]

There was an episode of The Outer Limits called "Trial by Fire" that dealt with water faring aliens visiting earth.

Re:In Reverse

[itzly]

It's very simple: we can't get there, and they can't get here.

And unless they happen to be very close, we can't even notice each other.

Re:In Reverse

[Oligonicella]

For organic molecules, I'd say anything sufficient to inhibit their interactions or congeal them would be harsh.

Re:In Reverse

[HughPickens.com]

The Killing Star, one of my favorite sf books of the past twenty years, explores this idea among many others. The book also presents a very interesting hypothesis that resolves the Fermi Paradox.

Re:In Reverse

[ultranova]

The book also presents a very interesting hypothesis that resolves the Fermi Paradox.

A hypothesis that falls apart when you start wondering how beings who embrace such logic ever built a society to begin with, and then avoided wiping each other out with nuclear weapons. Also, I can't help but think what happens if any set of species forms an alliance or even casual contact - attacking any warns all the others. So while we can't rule out a psychotic species causing havoc, it would be a weird aberration at worst.

Frankly, I find it much more likely that we simply happen to be amongst the first civilizations to develop. Universe is not that old, elements took time to manufacture, life took time to get from first whatever-they-were to us, and Earth has a lot of things going for it specifically.

Re:In Reverse

[Nidi62]

I actually suspect that the majority of life - and intelligent life - in the universe is probably ocean-based. If ever space aliens visit us, unlike the movies, I suspect their spaceships may be more likely to be like sealed aquariums than an air-breathing setup. I've never seen this idea reflected in science fiction though.

In the later books of the Lost Fleet series, they come across an alien race that is aquatic, with ships that are much more maneuverable than human ships. They theorized that the ships were in fact filled with water which allowed them to make more radical movements.

Re: In Reverse

[TapeCutter]

Deep sea vents were discovered when I was in my 20's before that we used to think abiogenesis had something to do with lightning hitting a mud puddle. The evidence that life formed around such vets on Earth is strong but inconclusive. Fatty acids from clay in the vent spontaneously form primitive cell membranes (in vents and mud puddles). Sulphur provides chemical energy, porous rock around the vent provides a sponge like scaffold for life to take root and extract passing nutrients. Most importantly the vents are predictable, the deep, still water stabilizes the temperature gradient. Convection currents cycle the fatty cells through the gradient allowing different chemical reactions within the membrane to synchronize themselves to the thermal cycle (much the same as plants match the cycle of night and day). If that really is how life got started then it's likely that primitive cells are still being spontaneously created near these vents today, the practical problem for scientists researching this idea is finding them before evolved life such as shrimp eat them.

Europa has all these conditions and like Earth it's ocean is also oxygenated at the top. Oxygen is vital for multicellular life on Earth, collagen (the stuff that holds individual cells together as multicellular critters) cannot form in an oxygen poor environment. Oxygen in Europa's ocean is replenished differently than it is on Earth. On Europa's surface strong radiation from Jupiter knocks the H2 off the ice and out into space, the free oxygen is returned to the ocean via plate tectonics. Personally I would think it very odd if we didn't find single celled life in Europa's ocean, at the very least it would force Science to radically rethink the conditions that lead to abiogenesis on Earth. What I'm interested to find out is whether life on Europa uses the same self-replicating molecules used by life on Earth, but I doubt I will be around to hear the answer..

Re:In Reverse

[Hognoxious]

The basis of technology is fire. Without that you can't even start smelting metals.

How would you, as a shaggy dolphin with a bone though your nose, make a fire underwater?

Re:In Reverse

[thunderclap]

Your arrogance amuses me. See the wonderful thing about science is we don't know what we don't know. Your statement is the equivalent of a village of tan people that have been trapped on an uncharted island in the pacific. You assume that everyone is the same as you see and that your technology is 18th century because thats all you have ever known.

We don't know if the speed of light is constant outside our gravity well because we haven't sent any sensors out of it yet. We believe that its constant. 600 yrs ago we believed in ether filling space, Geocentric model for our universe and that the earth was a flat disc.
We haven't mined any asteroids. The most we have is a highly controlled quantity of lunar regolith (dirt) that was far less than the expected estimates. We don't know if they are any heavier elements in the next two island groups.
Finally we don't know if they have steel or not. You understand that there are technologies we have completely lost yet the items produced still exist?
A perfect example is Damascus steel
It was a type of steel used in Middle Eastern swordmaking. These swords are characterized by distinctive patterns of banding and mottling reminiscent of flowing water. Such blades were reputed to be tough, resistant to shattering and capable of being honed to a sharp, resilient edge.

Damascus steel was originally made from wootz steel, a steel developed in India before the Common Era. The original method of producing Damascus steel is not known. Because of differences in raw materials and manufacturing techniques, modern attempts to duplicate the metal have not been successful. Despite this, several individuals in modern times have claimed that they have rediscovered the methods in which the original Damascus steel was produced.
They might have fusion drives using magnetic cores, housing units that know how to generate artificial gravity. construction methods that allowed it to be built in low planetary orbit, and other things we are fully capable of but neither have the economic will or current expertise to do.

The fact is aliens do exist as sure as we do. You want to know why? Because of evolution. If it works here, then it works everywhere else.
We haven't left for the stars because of people like you and because they isn't enough political will to do so, yet. There will be. Its kinda sad that it will mostly be the Chinese who will do it. However, someone will.
Then you comment will be treated with the same derision that the '4 computers ever', 'the 640k', 'the sun orbits the earth' and the earth flat comments are.

Re: In Reverse

[thunderclap]

I'm not a biologist, but it seems to me that life is more keen to utilize energy through more complicated but well defined pathways rather than through unpredictable thermal excitations, much like your car prefers a piston engine and a gearbox to Orion-style detonations.

There is a level of coolness attributed to a car that does Orion-style detonations. Mind you, you wouldn't survive but still.

Re:In Reverse

[towermac]

I'm with you. I'll bet a dollar that there are no hydrothermal shrimp on Europa; our freak shrimp are descended from regular shrimp who got away from hungry fish, and if there is so much as bacteria on Europa, I'll be shocked.

But we do have here, in these little blind shrimp, a candidate species with which to seed Europa's ocean. I assume they taste as good as regular shrimp.

As long as we don't mind them arriving in stores freeze dried and already irradiated ...

Re:In Reverse

[towermac]

Thank you. Venturing into space starts with flying through the gaseous atmosphere. Which starts with standing at the bottom of that atmosphere, staring up at the stars, and wishing you could fly. You can't even see stars from underwater.

I might be imagination challenged, but I just don't see a progressive species with opposable thumbs and language developing underwater.

Re: In Reverse

[O('_')O_Bush]

I think the point of his last sentence was making the point more elegantly than what you parroted back at him.

But anyways, I will laugh when we do punch through the ice on Europa and the probe finds itself in a jelly-like biofilm that harvests energy from whatever tectonics or tidal energy is imparted by Jupiter. Or something else so (rightfully) alien that there are no good biological analogs on Earth.

Re:In Reverse

[Blaskowicz]

I thought that in that movie, the aliens were an ancient civilization (apparently much wiser than ours) whose home planet is Earth. They evolved in the depth of the oceans, became an intelligent species and then a technological one. Later on, humanity is busy doing its mankind stuff (war, pillage etc.) but they're unaware of the deep sea "aliens", separated from us by kilometers of water rather than light-years of empty space.

Re:In Reverse

[Hognoxious]

That was fiction. Oh, and so was that \|/
 

Re: In Reverse

[RockDoctor]

If that really is how life got started then it's likely that primitive cells are still being spontaneously created near these vents today

Modern conditions are very considerably different to those in which life developed on earth.

For a start, there is oxygen. Now, it may be true that oxygen is essential for large organisms to develop (we only have a sample of one ecosystem, in which oxygen is almost ubiquitously associated with large organisms ; but that's an "almost ubiquitously", not an "always" ; the case may be suggestive, but it is certainly not proven.), but we're not talking about large organisms, we're talking about the formation of the first very small organisms. For certain, life evolved on Earth for a very long time before there was any significant amount of free oxygen in the ecosystem. Life and significant concentrations of oxygen have coexisted at best for a half of the duration of life on Earth.

For a second thing, the modern world is full of organisms that breakdown ad re-use organic molecules. While there is a lot of debate about what particular compounds were common in the pre-biotic/ peri-biogenetic environment, it is sure that the modern environment has been stripped of many of the more complex molecules. Some of that stripping is due to the molecules being broken up by reaction with oxygen (see above), but much of it is simply going to be eaten.

The likelihood of life spontaneously developing around modern deep-sea vents (or shallow-sea vents, for that matter) is considered pretty low, even though their ancient analogues are certainly sites of interest for biogenetic models.

Radical re-thinking about the possible environments for biogenesis happens almost every time there is a new student writing a paper on the subject. There is not a scientific consensus on the question (though there are certainly ideas that are more popular than others). If this clashes with what you've heard on Discovery Channel, then I'd advise you to swap their (pretty shoddy) "journalism" for actually reading the relevant science. Much of it is available open access.

Re: In Reverse

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Well, a hydrothermal vent is VERY predictable - and STEADY.

Yes, but those life forms aren't working like thermocouplers, are they? They're still not working along the lines of "let's just inject a lot of heat into a living organism and see what random stuff happens". They're just carefully digesting some of the products of reactions occurring nearby.

Re:In Reverse

[cusco]

The Anti-Humans-In-Space Nutters seem to have descended in force on this topic. Two centuries ago they would have been busily shouting down anyone who predicted that someday humans would travel faster than 35 miles an hour.

Re:In Reverse

[cusco]

One of my favorite mouse-over comments on XKCD goes to the effect of, "There is no logical economic reason to go to the stars. The universe is full of civilizations and species that lived and died on a solitary planet, discovered and recorded by the species which did the illogical thing."

Re:In Reverse

[cusco]

I believe it was Arthur Clarke who I heard speculate that we may have already encountered other sentient life and just not recognized it. If something lived so slowly that it took decades or years to form a coherent thought we would never have the patience to talk to it (even if we could figure out how). If something lived so quickly that it was here and gone in a day it wouldn't have the patience to talk to us. For some long-lived species a trip between stars that lasted a thousand years, to us essentially an impossibility, might be the equivalent of an evening parking on Lover's Lane.

Re:In Reverse

[Optali]

We still don't know how abiogenesis works and our current environment could perfectly be such a "harsher environment".

Re: In Reverse

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Deep sea vents were discovered when I was in my 20's before that we used to think abiogenesis had something to do with lightning hitting a mud puddle. The evidence that life formed around such vets on Earth is strong but inconclusive. Fatty acids from clay in the vent spontaneously form primitive cell membranes (in vents and mud puddles). Sulphur provides chemical energy, porous rock around the vent provides a sponge like scaffold for life to take root and extract passing nutrients. Most importantly the vents are predictable, the deep, still water stabilizes the temperature gradient. Convection currents cycle the fatty cells through the gradient allowing different chemical reactions within the membrane to synchronize themselves to the thermal cycle (much the same as plants match the cycle of night and day). If that really is how life got started then it's likely that primitive cells are still being spontaneously created near these vents today, the practical problem for scientists researching this idea is finding them before evolved life such as shrimp eat them..

Yeah, all this makes sense, but all you're describing is really what I meant with those "more predictable pathways". It's not like the life forms living around those vents are just bathing in the heat and having it fuel various endothermic reactions, which is what I understood by the mention of "more free energy around [in high-temperature environment]". Surely this can help some things, but it can be as easily destructive as it can be constructive. Heating a soup of chemicals can eventually give you a lot of interesting other chemicals, but for organized, self-replicating systems, that's not the major issue.

Re: Most expensive sushi ever

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Considering the Japanese penchant for rare sea delicacies, this could certainly provide a boost to their space program. Unless they get overtaken by the Chinese in case we find alien sea cucumbers on Europa, of course.

Astronaut take out food

[__aanbvm4272]

Extremely large Shrimp...I hope Europa has a drive up window...I hate getting out of my spaceship I also hate the idea of being the meal for an extremely LARGE Shrimp.

Re:Dear Slashdot: Messaging is broke

[BarbaraHudson]

It's been broken, fixed for a few days, then broken for a week now. Send a report via email to feedback@slashdot.org

Fission powered shrimp, unlike normal fusion power

[Eunuchswear]

Must resist temptation to make fission chips joke.

Re:hydrothermal vents...

[BarbaraHudson]

It's been broken, fixed for a few days, then broken for a week now. feedback@slashdot.org

No Microscopes on Mars

[Anonymous Coward]

When the recent 'landers' reached Mars, suspicion turned to the lack of microscopes amongst the range of 'life detecting' systems carried by the devices. NASA at first panicked, and then realised they could describe the macro-cameras used to study geological specimens as 'microscopes', and that the betas would be dumb enough to buy this explanation.

Humanity is run by the big organised churches- in the West the Judaic churches of Islam, Modern Christianity (nothing to do with the original Christianity of the original followers of Jesus) and Judaism. The elites at the tops of these churches have absolute dominance in leading industrialised nations, especially the USA.

Now the churches are still highly troubled by the impact on the dumbed down sheeple they rule over as to the impact of 'proof' of 'extraterrestrial' life. They have yet to be convinced that such a revelation would NOT end the rule by organised 'religion'. Those at the TRUE top of NASA answer to the leaders of these churches.

There are NO MICROSCOPES ON MARS because actual images of micro-organisms would end all debate about the presence of life. The best science/engineering student in ANY US high-school could design a microscope-based instrumentation system for any Mars lander at vastly lower cost than any of the sensor systems currently carried by these probes. Yet NASA pays millions of dollars to PR agencies to troll appropriate forums with 'proof' as to why microscopes would be 'useless' , and yet (in a totally perverse logic) are present on the landers anyway.

Anyone with any decent science skills KNOWS the original Mars Landers of the last century proved the presence of life on Mars with their chemistry sets- but the consequence was a massive FUD campaign denying the results of the experiments.

The microscopy of Hooke changed the world centuries back. NASA claims doing no more than Hooke was able to do with the most primitive equipment is beyond the possibility of modern space engineering- and has a legion of trolls to back up this nonsense (watch the responses to this post).

You betas are told on forums like this one that rationality rules the world- nothing could be further from the truth. Internet science outlets aimed at BETAS are about control, not knowledge. You are told NEVER to look at the men behind the curtain at NASA, but instead to empathise with the low level engineers and scientists that work there- an old psychological trick. Engineers and scientists, by and large, have the very opposite of forceful personalities. They are rarely outspoken, and almost never dare go against their bosses. If the agenda of those that employ them is dubious, the science always loses out.

We KNOW as an absolute fact, that vast numbers of Earth life types survive all aspects of the space 'vacuum' found in our Solar System, and thus can easily seed suitable extra-terrestrial eco-systems if given the chance to travel. We KNOW, as an absolute fact, that meteor collisions and volcanic eruptions send matter from one planetary body to another in our Solar System. Not one ALPHA scientist living who has considered the issue doubts we will find extra-terrestrial life in many places within our Solar System as a consequence- with the greater likelihood that the genetic basis of such life will be remarkably similar.

A standard culture dish on Mars observed by a standard microscope would already have proven the presence of life there beyond the doubt of even the simplest-minded visitor to this site. This is the EXACT reason NASA has refused to carry out such an obvious test. Meanwhile every single politician in the US Congress will vote to give absolute support to every atrocity carried out by Israel- continuing the foul, depraved dominance of vile organised religion over the affairs of Mankind.

It is deemed too hard to sell the idea of the 'chosen people' and the 'master race' and 'mass murder in the name of god' if sheeple wake up one day and find themselves looking at microscope photographs from Mars showing actual living organisms. The entire upper management of NASA supported the recent Holocaust in Gaza. Either organised religion is dominant, or science- but NEVER both.

Re:No Microscopes on Mars

[Brett Buck]

Now see, THIS, gentlemen, is how to sling bullshit. Please make a note of it.

A planet full of shrimp?

[nowsharing]

Well, we know where the dophins are heading.

Re:Most expensive sushi ever

[rubycodez]

all these shrimp are yours, except Europas, eat no crustaceans there

Say what?

[s.petry]

This is something trying to build a hypothesis on a theory that has no evidence at all. Sure, I find it as interesting as most people in terms of discussing possibilities, but this is dreaming and not "science". Anyone discussing life off of our own Earth needs lots of research.. like namely finding life so we could possibly begin to formulate a hypothesis on it's origin.

I actually suspect that the majority of life - and intelligent life - in the universe is probably ocean-based. If ever space aliens visit us, unlike the movies, I suspect their spaceships may be more likely to be like sealed aquariums than an air-breathing setup. I've never seen this idea reflected in science fiction though.

Look, I am honestly not trying to be a Debbie Downer on you, but you are attempting to critique someone's imagination with your own imagination. Dreaming and imagining are good things, and we need them. Dream, write about your dreams, and make a billion dollars in book sales. Just don't confuse imagination with facts and attempt to "correct" other people's imaginations with your own..

Re:Dear Slashdot: Messaging is broke

[Hognoxious]

Am I imagining this?

A long time ago, before beta was even a twinkle in some dreadlocked UXtard's eye, you could reply to a comment or follow an external link and when you came back you were at the very place you left from, rather than the top of the accursed page?

And recently, for just a few days, you could again. And now you can't again?

In other news...

[SIGBUS]

"Extreme Shrimp" is going to be my next band name.

Extreme Shrimp

[jslaff]

I saw Extreme Shrimp back in the '80s. Opened for Blondie and Television at CBGB. Neo-punk band, ahead of their day. Great times, those.

Re: Most expensive sushi ever

[Optali]

Ah, OK, this explains a lot!
Now I finally know what all these Chinese are doing in Amsterdam!