Astonishing News From Mars

What makes this 'astonishing'? Did you expect something different? Given all that we've learned of Mars over the past 3 decades it doesn't seem that surprising to me.

Editor's note: Gee, the actual experts were all surprised. Are you an expert too?

I think I reserve 'astonish' for something totally unexpected. Clearly, the Phoenix team was anticipating this possibility; they may be surprised in the sense that it is as closely analogous to Antarctic dry valleys as it is. My understanding is that it is not that they are astonished. Much of the best work on extreme conditions under which life exists look toward those same dry valleys as potential examples of niches in which Martian life might exist. This work has been ongoing for a long time. So, I guess I still ask the question: Did you expect something different? I am not an expert on Martian soil - just the atmosphere.

I guess I should clarify: it's not that I don't think Sam's and the Phoenix team's work isn't cool, excellent, or exciting. I find it fantastic and think very highly of the experiments they have put into place. I know we will learn a huge amount about this region of Mars.

What bothers me is the description of it being 'astonishing'. I would think that finding direct evidence of life would be astonishing. As someone who works in planetary science, I feel that the strong push to make every discovery 'front page news' can be over the top, and tends to dilute the truly groundchanging events that do happen from time to time.

OK, last comment, but I found what I remember reading earlier in the day. I know David Paige, and he is an expert, and he wasn't surprised by the results either. "Planetary scientist David Paige of the University of California, Los Angeles, said it is too early to tell whether the minerals found in the soil could support life. Paige, who had no role in the mission, said the find was not surprising because rocks weather over time and bits of minerals mix with the soil."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/space/06/26/phoenix.mars.ap/index.html

Again, please don't take this criticism as demeaning of the science. The science is great! I just don't think it is astonishing!

Editor's note. I am a biologist. I do.

To Mark and Editor--

To be honest, I initially was quite surprised. Nicholas Tosca et al. published in Science on May 30 that Meridiani Planum likely was extremely salty and acidic in its heyday and became more salty over time. And to be honest, every soil seen on Mars since the Viking era has had gross similarities to Meridiani, e.g., quite a bit of sulfur.

But I recalled a talk I heard at LPSC 2004 (by Don Burt???), which questioned why Martian soils were so acidic, since the planet is mainly basaltic. Basalt is a great acid neutralizer. Thus, basaltic soils (without any additional acid source) should have alkali PHs (8-10 or so).

Coming down the pipe since have been some spectroscopic observations/meteorite analyses suggesting at least one episode of H2O interacting with volcanic SO2 photochemically altered to SO3, producing sulfuric acid precipitation and the kind of waters that could produce the kinds of soils we've seen for Viking, Pathfinder, and the Rovers. Due to Jean Pierre Bibring's thoughts, some folks are referring to these episodes as a theiikian era or theiikian "catastrophe."

But not all of the planet's surface materials that we see today need have experienced this kind of alteration, being potentially deposited before (and somehow shielded from the acid), as in the case (possibly) of some of the clay mineral deposits inferred from orbital spectroscopy. Or perhaps there was a less acidic period later...

Anyway, I think Mr. Cowing's headline is quite appropriate. This measurement is going to send thinking about Martian history and habitability into some interesting directions.

I'd call this a pleasant confirmation more than astonishing.

There was a study out last year using Mars-1 regolith simulant, various plant seeds and several types of fertilizers. The tests were mainly using bacterial/fungal inoculants against artificial fertilizers. The bio-inoculants and Mars-1 produced wholly useful, cultivatable results - it's no surprise the Mars actual soil has all the minerals needed for asparagus. It is VERY welcome news that Phoenix confirmed.

Upon further review (i.e. his three succeeding comments), I'm going to admit Mark's point on usage. I was not struck dumb by religious awe and wonder to hear this news, but then again, I'm not a biologist.

I don't see what all the hub-bub is about either. They grew a plant on Mars, in martian soil, in George Pal's "Conquest of Space" decades ago. ;-)

There is also a "Space Chimps" movie coming out, too. At least we can't blame Disney/Pixar for a lack of interest in space.

"It is the type of soil you would probably have in your back yard - you know, alkaline. You might be able to grow asparagus in it really well." -Sam Kounaves, chemist from University of Arizona

Sam's comment resonated very strongly with me given some previous work that I worked on while a graduate student in the Ferl lab at University of Florida. Dr. Robert J. Ferl (whom, with friend and colleague Dr. Anna-Lisa Paul will be this July in his 3rd year at the HMP's Arthur C. Clarke greenhouse) was a co-PI in one of the original (43 I think) Mars Scout submissions named AMEBA: Automated Mars Environmental and Biological Assay. Among the assays onboard the proposed probe included genetically modified Arabidopsis seeds to be grown in scooped up regolith within a special pressurized growth chamber. The point was to grow a set of these plants to find out how they'd respond to the condition of the regolith and pressurized mixtures of the Martian atmosphere.

It made the news with some fanfare and debate, especially with a title like: Jellyplants on Mars

Although many people still cannot get past the notion of purposefully bringing life to Mars, the mission's only real problem was that it was ahead of it's time. If we are eventually going to send humans to Mars, plants will need to come along for the ride. Dr. Kounaves made a point more salient than he perhaps realizes, however, and the results from this successful Mars Scout mission may eventually prove to be the main reasons to send little green plants in the future.

We need a soil return mission. It's the only way we can fully examine the soil for life. It would also be a good practice mission, for bringing back astronauts from mars.

If we can't bring back a good size soil sample, then we certainly can't bring back astronauts.

Sometimes I wonder if the reason we don't look directly for alien life, is that it would not be politically correct. Maybe we don't want to take a chance on disproving someones religion.