Slashdot Mirror


Bacteria Found On ISS May Be Alien In Origin, Says Cosmonaut (independent.co.uk)

Kekke writes: Lots of buzz around this. Russian cosmonaut Anton Shkaplerov took routine samples from the outside of the International Space Station during a spacewalk. These samples were analyzed and found to contain bacteria that must have come from somewhere other than Earth or the ISS itself. "Bacteria that had not been there during the launch of the ISS module were found on the swabs," Mr. Shkaplerov told TASS Russian News Agency. "So they have flown from somewhere in space and settled on the outside hull." He made it clear that "it seems, there is no danger," and that scientists are doing more work to find out what they are. The Independent writes, "Finding bacteria that came from somewhere other than Earth would be one of the biggest breakthroughs in the history of science -- but much more must be done before such a claim is made."

43 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Wrong conclusion? by rahenri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just because it wasn't there during the launch it doesn't mean it didn't come from Earth.

    1. Re: Wrong conclusion? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was me, ok? I jerked off on the ISS. Are you happy now???

    2. Re:Wrong conclusion? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just because it wasn't there during the launch it doesn't mean it didn't come from Earth.

      Just because they thought it wasn't there at launch doesn't mean it wasn't there at launch.

    3. Re:Wrong conclusion? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Low Earth orbit is pretty much part of Earth. Its in our outer atmosphere for a start. Bacteria from the moon (but not from the inside of a camera) would be a big deal.

    4. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Maritz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It will be non-trivially difficult to 'prove' that these bacteria are not from Earth. High standard of evidence to be met. I wish them luck, they'll need it.

      --
      I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
    5. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Gilgaron · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are plenty of native bacteria that won't grow in culture, and one reason archaea took so long to elucidate is that it is hard to use PCR on "unknowns." Since we wouldn't have primers for an alien bacterium (and really no reason to expect it to be using DNA or RNA at all, unless panspermia is correct and it has common ancestry with us) we'd mostly have to be lucky that it was able to be cultured. It'll be a while before we can find truly alien microbes with any ease.

    6. Re: Wrong conclusion? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      That's not how you become a fapstronaut. You're doing it wrong!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    7. Re:Wrong conclusion? by Xyrus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, the chance of some other life form not using DNA/RNA is very very low. Carbon based organic molecules and amino acids have been found pretty much everywhere we have looked including interstellar gas clouds. They're all over the place. And RNA is about as basic as you can get for consistent replication molecule.

      Now hypothetically any other "sticky" atom could be a basis for organic type chemistry (like silicon) but they are all less likely due to the difficulty of the chemistry. It COULD happen under the right circumstances, but we don't see the silicon equivalent of amino acids on comets or in interstellar gas clouds.

      Back to this story, it is unlikely that these organism are extra-terrestrial. There are any number of ways terrestrial bacteria could have found there way up there. It's a bold and foolish claim that they would be from elsewhere without hard evidence.

      --
      ~X~
    8. Re:Wrong conclusion? by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Given that he jumped to the conclusion based on "There's bacteria there" it might not actually be that hard to prove it to himself.

      I will say though, you're right in a way. Our methods of investigating life are all biased for a very small subset of possible life, even on earth. LB Agar plates grow only a small subset of earth bacteria. Investigations that took sea water and just sequenced the DNA they found in it suggested that an astonishing majority of bacteria on our own planet is totally unstudied. We simply don't know how to grow most earth bacteria enough to study it.

      If this bacteria IS of ET origin, they'll smear it on a plate, it won't grow, and we won't be able to draw any conclusions. If it's of earth origin, odds are good the same thing will happen, and we again won't really know. We'll assume it's earth bacteria because it's pretty obviously earth bacteria, but we won't know.

    9. Re:Wrong conclusion? by rgbatduke · · Score: 2

      Why? With genetic analysis almost routine at this point, I would expect that they could at the very least state that the bacterium(s) in question are/are not genetically congruent with known Earth species. If they find an E Coli on the outside of the station, it almost certainly came from Earth. If they find a bacterium with a genetic structure that is distinct from pretty much all known Earth species, it won't prove that it is extraterrestrial, but it would make it a lot less likely. At the very least, explaining how -- and when -- it got there will be more challenging.

      If the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... hypothesis is correct (where this might be evidence supporting the hypothesis, or might not) then this will be only the first of many such observations, as "life" on Earth would have originated in an early population 1 stellar system in this galaxy and would then have been dispersed over billions of years after (say) that early P1 star went nova and/or some other cataclysm dispersed matter with biological travellers attached. We have recently directly observed that not only comets but large cold asteroids are knocking around that sometimes pass through on hyperbolic orbits. One expects a lot more (much) smaller objects are out there that pass through than ones large enough to observe from Earth, and it is by no means implausible that one would fall on early/primordial Earth and land ice cold to seed the planet, IF panspermia is in any sense approximately correct.

      Note well I'm not endorsing it or arguing for it, just presenting it as one not unreasonable hypothesis and noting that that is really what all of this is about. Even if the bacteria is eventually labelled "probably/plausibly extraterrestrial" it doesn't prove panspermia, as it might have come from life originating on Mars, or a Jovian moon, or even a comet -- since we don't have a working model of biogenesis we cannot really exclude any particular possibilities for the origin of life. It could even have come first from the Earth, been blown into escape speed by e.g. a falling asteroid or a volcanic explosion, landed on a young Mars and evolved for a while there, and been blown BACK into space from Mars during an asteroid collision or whatever. Genetic testing ought to significantly favor one or more of the various alternative hypotheses, and if it is a common Earth bacteria, I'd say that this is nothing but probable contamination or some entirely mundane form of low orbit transport as suggested above. But if it is NOT related to an KNOWN Earth bacteria, then things get interesting...

      --
      Even when the experts all agree, they may well be mistaken. --- Bertrand Russell.
    10. Re:Wrong conclusion? by HelpTheNewOverlord · · Score: 2

      If bacteria is that common in space, would it not have already fallen into Earth and thus be a KNOWN species? Or if unknown, just not discovered yet?

      It think it pretty hard to believe that one unknown type of bacteria got into the ISS wind shield without also getting into Earth surface.

  2. How fast is the ISS going? by Tinsoldier314 · · Score: 5, Funny

    After all this time, the extraterrestrial life that we found ended up being a proverbial bug on the windshield of the ISS?

    1. Re:How fast is the ISS going? by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Funny

      They came to great us and we splattered them. Remember this date. The first strike in the war with the aliens was from us. #ashamedtobehuman #buglivesmatter

  3. They have DNA sequencer on board by wisebabo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They have miniature DNA sequencer on board, they can find out if it matches at all with any sequenced earthly strain. (I have one also, it is a MinION by Oxford nanowire technologies. Although not perfect it should be capable of sequencing this).

    If it truly of extraterrestrial origin it should be immediately obvious as it is would have diverged very far from the âoeTree of Lifeâ (thatâ(TM)s assuming there are any similarities at all).

    It, would also be incredibly valuable and not just from a scientific standpoint. Just a single completely novel protein has caused multi-billion dollar biotech revolutions. Here would be an organism with potentially thousands.

    1. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Ubi_NL · · Score: 2

      If it is non-terrestrial, why would it use DNA, and then specifically the exact 4 nucleotides that we use?

      The only evidence here by the way is: we looked really careful and did not see it then so it must be from space.

      --

      If an experiment works, something has gone wrong.
    2. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's like asking why stars and planets exist outside of our solar system. Nature has order and DNA probably exists everywhere and not just on what you assume is our one-of-a-kind little world.

    3. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Informative

      So while it's likely that life is based on DNA elsewhere in the universe

      We don't have sufficient data to claim that it's likely. We only have a single data point, and very little understanding of the mechanism that led to evolution of DNA.

    4. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That's just a wild guess on your part. Right now, we have no reason to assume such a thing.

      DNA consists of commonly available ingredients, can guide its own self-assembly, is stable, and nucleotides form abiotically. No other known material has all of these characteristics. There are retroviruses that use RNA, and protein based prions, but neither of these has evolved beyond being parasites of DNA based life. If another mechanisms was more viable for the basis of life, then why have none displaced DNA on earth, despite 4 billion years of opportunities?

      When we find life elsewhere in the Universe, I think it is very likely it will be DNA based.

    5. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by meerling · · Score: 2

      It will have some means of replication, and it's likely it will function like DNA, or even be DNA, but that doesn't mean it will use the same letters/bases.
      Our DNA uses AGCT
      While RNA uses AGCU
      RNA is very similar to DNA and can do the same functions. Apparently some of the processes in our body have things switched between DNA & RNA.
      There can be other bases being used, which would be different letters. We've even synthesized some, and they seemed to have worked and were replicated along with the rest of the DNA successfully. We don't know what they do yet, but that's not a surprise at all.
      It's very reasonable that an alien genetics might have different bases/letters in it's DNA, in which case that would make it almost guaranteed it's not from earth.

      Of course, there's also the Panspermia idea, in which case alien microbes from space could be exactly the same as a microbe on Earth, because it originally came from space, and might even be the first life on this planet. But to give that any real credence, we'd have to find it someplace a lot further away than low earth orbit. After all, if it matches something on Earth, how can we honestly say it didn't come from Earth?

    6. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by arth1 · · Score: 2

      Good luck with the library prep in zero G! I'm intrigued to know how well pipetting works in these conditions!

      Quite well, I should think. Capillary action, Van der Waal forces and surface tension are incredibly much stronger than gravity. There's no problem preparing a microscope slide upside down, and only mildly problematic sideways (due to a problem they won't have on the ISS).

    7. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by Gilgaron · · Score: 2

      Yet there'd be little reason to expect any similarity with the DNA codons to protein translations, even if DNA were to be somewhat inevitable. If we found an alien world teaming with life much like ours here, it would be shocking if we could eat the fruit there, for example.

    8. Re:They have DNA sequencer on board by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yet there'd be little reason to expect any similarity with the DNA codons to protein translations

      Yes, they would likely have a different genetic code, and a different set of amino acids. But it is still likely that the fundamentals would be similar: using DNA codons to specify a sequence of amino acids.

      If we found an alien world teaming with life much like ours here, it would be shocking if we could eat the fruit there, for example.

      As long as we can have sex with their women, who cares about the fruit?

  4. Not a likely explanation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The claims of alien bacteria on the ISS are being met with widespread skepticism.

  5. Mutated bacteria by Ayano · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While in space most likely. The fact that we're even able to classify it bacteria rather than a foreign micro organism is telling.

    --
    I don't read AC
  6. I tole you! by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    What'd I tell you? I said aliens coming. I tole you and you didn't listen.

    They're our space brothers coming to protect the President from all the haters and libs. Oh, it's happening, now. Bet on it. Check fucking mate.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  7. ISS orbit is within our atmosphere by RhettLivingston · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The ISS orbit is so low it is within the upper reaches of our atmosphere. That is why it has to be given regular boosts to keep it in orbit. Though super thin, it does encounter enough atmosphere to induce drag.

    Just as we have found unusual organisms in the deepest oceans and even miles down in rock, we should expect to find bacteria at the limits of our atmosphere and even beyond. It should also be expected that they have evolved dramatically, as organisms living off of heat and sulfur deep in our oceans have done.

    There are some out of this world organisms right here at home. I'm not even sure how you could prove extraterrestrial origin. Almost anything you find could just be evidence of a previously undiscovered unique ecosystem 100+ miles up.

    It's sort of neat to imagine the possibility of some life form surfing around on the auroras in the thermosphere.

  8. Oh, come on!! by DrTJ · · Score: 5, Informative

    ISS har for 20 years been orbiting - a close distance - around a planet with gazillions bacteria an microbes, and been visited by more than a hundred people, and it was lanuched through the atmosphere containing lots of microscopic life, and as soon as bacteria is found on the outside, it is considered likely to be of alien origin?

    Gimme a break!

    I would be very surprised if we could keep it completely clean from earthly contaimination, even if we are talking about the outside.

    1. Re:Oh, come on!! by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 2

      ...and it was lanuched through the atmosphere containing lots of microscopic life...

      The parts that make up the ISS were launched as payloads on other vehicles. I don't believe they were ever exposed to the atmosphere during ascent.

      --
      People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
    2. Re:Oh, come on!! by complete+loony · · Score: 2

      Don't forget the space walks. How many times have astronauts put on a suit while inside the station, then touched the outside of the ISS.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
  9. agents Mulder and Scully will investigate this by tech-law-ny · · Score: 2

    They will also learn that the Cigarette Smoking Man does, in fact, smoke on the ISS.

  10. Don't get your hopes up by locater16 · · Score: 2

    What does "not there at launch" mean? The ISS has had multiple modules installed over the course of many years, almost 20 at this point. And bacteria is notoriously hard to kill. Martian probes undergo a thorough sterilization before launch just to avoid contamination of mars by earth bacteria, and between scrubbing and radiation and vacuum and etc. Nasa still isn't sure they've killed all of it. And yes bacteria can survive in space.

    All of this makes it seem fantastically likely that, hey it's just earth bacteria. Stuff can grow almost anywhere.

  11. More Russian Fake News by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 4, Funny

    This 'bacteria' will be analysed and found to be a mixture of borscht and jizz.

  12. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by meerling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's called Panspermia, if it really is non-terrestrial, but odds are very high that it's terrestrial.
    Despite sterilization we have found bacterial colonies many times on our space hardware, and they've always been from Earth.
    Not only does it only take a single bacteria to survive and reach that location, as the article mentioned, there are things that can loft microorganisms to insane altitudes. I have doubts they can go as high as the space station, but there are rockets they can hitch a ride on, and again, it only takes one to start a colony.
    Don't forget that "just because it wasn't there before" only means that it was undetected for some reason, maybe because it was too small.
    And also, even if they don't have a match to a known terrestrial DNA sequence, still doesn't mean it's alien. It could just be that their database isn't complete. Actually we know the database of microbial DNA is not complete, so that's a given.
    Now if it doesn't match anything from Earth, and it's not close enough to be related to any known microbe, and an analysis of it's DNA doesn't show any real matches of any terrestrial DNA sequences at all, then it might be alien. (There are lots of shared sequences among all life on Earth, since they all share common ancestors, it's just some are more closely related than others.)
    If it's DNA uses something other than AGCT or AGCU, then it's almost guaranteed it's non-terrestrial/alien.

  13. Reminds me of the "Phantom" that hauted Germany by grungeman · · Score: 5, Informative

    A few years ago there was a woman in Germany that seemed to have been involved in all kinds of spectacular crimes, mostly murder. Her DNA was found on various crime scenes that seemed totally unrelated, She must have been the most wanted criminal for a while and was called the "Phantom". There was a $400,000 reward put on her head

    Of course it turned out in a slightly different way than police had expected. The DNA that was found was actually from a female factory worker packaging the cotton swabs that were used by German police to collect DNA, so these DNA traces were simply a contamination. Here is the whole story: http://content.time.com/time/w...

    You can expect something similar from the bacteria on the ISS. Everybody of course wants some spectacular news, but unfortunately there are far more mundane ways how the bacteria could have ended up there.

    --

    Signature deleted by lameness filter.
  14. Travel by yobjob · · Score: 2

    Because bacteria can travel through interstellar space and hit a space station orbiting Earth, but bacteria can't travel a few thousand feet from Earth to a space station.

  15. 250 miles up (Dallas to Houston), 6,200 mile atmos by raymorris · · Score: 5, Informative

    Agreed. Imagine you have an 8 inch volleyball, drenched with syrup. A quarter of an inch away, almost touching the syrup-coated volleyball, there is a coin and you find microscopic traces of syrup on the coin. How do you guess the trace of a syrup got on the coin?

    Most likely, it came from the big ball of syrup right next to the coin. Or maybe somehow syrup came in from outside and got on the coin, without ever making it 1/4 inch further to get in the volleyball. Which seems most plausible?

    That's the scale we're talking about with ISS. Earth is 8,000 miles diameter, 25,000 miles circumference. The atmosphere extends to 6,200 miles up (exosphere). ISS is below the exosphere, in the thermosphere. ISS is only 250 from the surface - nearly touching the ground.

    As someone else hinted, IIS is also travelling 18,000 miles per hour. At that altitude, there are roughly 4,000,000,000 air molecules per cubic meter*. Meaning ISS is colliding with billions of air molecules per second. It would be surprising if they didn't get a bug on the windshield.

    * Yeah I used imperial and metric in the same post. Get over it.

  16. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by scdeimos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    More likely it came from one of the dozens of space vehicles to have docked with the ISS over the years.

  17. the collision would have vapourised them by Jerry+Atrick · · Score: 2

    Hard to believe any bacteria could survive the collision velocities involved with an orbiting object, whether they floated in from space or up from the atmosphere. They were there when it launched.

    1. Re:the collision would have vapourised them by swilver · · Score: 2

      That's not hard to believe at all. Bacteria have almost no mass, getting hit by an object going very fast would only result in a tiny amount of energy being released as a result of the collision, certainly not enough to kill the bacteria.

  18. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The bacteria is not alien, it comes from north Korean missile launches.
    Now you may argue that there is little difference between alien and north Korean, but north Korea is still on Earth.

  19. Re:Perhaps it's just radically mutated Earth bacte by shortscruffydave · · Score: 2

    The sort of mutation that you might expect to find in an environment with tons of radiation flying around?

  20. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

    And, while interesting, it's also basically unprovable. We can't prove that the bacteria didn't come from Earth, at best we can prove that we've never seen that bacteria on Earth. We also can't prove it did come from Earth, at best we can prove that it exists on Earth.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  21. Re:I'm not saying it's aliens... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

    APK, you are a lying, ignorant, willfully dishonest, no-class, spamming, racist, moronic cunt with nothing to offer anyone. Again, I have zero time for someone as worthless as you. Stop wasting your own obviously worthless time by trying to stalk me around the site you dumb sack of shit.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black