Substance providing scientific evidence of past or present life
A biosignature (sometimes called chemical fossil or molecular fossil) is any substance – such as an element, isotope, or molecule – or phenomenon that provides scientific evidence of past or present life. Measurable attributes of life include its complex physical or chemical structures and its use of free energy and the production of biomass and wastes. A biosignature can provide evidence for living organisms outside the Earth and can be directly or indirectly detected by searching for their unique byproducts.
In general, biosignatures can be grouped into ten broad categories:
Isotope patterns: Isotopic evidence or patterns that require biological processes.
Chemistry: Chemical features that require biological activity.
Determining if a potential biosignature is worth being investigated is a fundamentally complicated process. Scientists must consider any and every possible alternate explanation before concluding that something is a true biosignature. This includes investigating the minute details that make other planets unique and being able to understand when there is a deviation from the expected non-biological processes present on a planet. In the case of a planet with life, it is possible that these differences can be extremely small or not present at all, adding to the difficulties of discovering a biosignature. Years of scientific studies have culminated in three criteria that a potential biosignature must meet in order to be considered viable for further research: Reliability, survivability, and detectability.
False positive mechanisms for oxygen on a variety of planet scenarios. The molecules in each large rectangle represent the main contributors to a spectrum of the planet's atmosphere. The molecules circled in yellow represent the molecules that would help confirm a false positive biosignature if they were detected. Furthermore, the molecules crossed out in red would help confirm a false positive biosignature if they were not detected. Cartoon adapted from Victoria Meadows' 2018 oxygen as a biosignature study.
A biosignature must be able to dominate over all other processes that may produce similar physical, spectral, and chemical features. When investigating a potential biosignature, scientists must be careful to consider all other possible origins of the biosignature in question. There are many forms of life that are known to mimic geochemical reactions. In fact, one of the theories on the origin of life involves molecules figuring out how to catalyze geochemical reactions to exploit the energy being released by them. These are some of the earliest known metabolisms (see methanogenesis). In a case such as this, scientists might search for a disequilibrium in the geochemical cycle, which would point to a reaction happening more or less often than it should. A disequilibrium such as this could be interpreted as an indication of life.
A biosignature must be able to last for long enough so that a probe, telescope, or human can be able to detect it. A consequence of a biological organism's use of metabolic reactions for energy is the production of metabolic waste. In addition, the structure of an organism can be preserved as a fossil and we know that some fossils on Earth are as old as 3.5 billion years. These byproducts can make excellent biosignatures since they provide direct evidence for life. However, in order to be a viable biosignature, a byproduct must subsequently remain intact so that scientists may discover it.
For a biosignature to be relevant in the context of scientific investigation, it must be detectable with the technology currently available. This seems to be an obvious statement, however there are many scenarios in which life may be present on a planet, yet remain undetectable because of human-caused limitations.
Every possible biosignature is associated with its own set of unique false positive mechanisms, or non-biological processes that can mimic the detectable feature of a biosignature. An important example of this is using oxygen as a biosignature. On Earth, the majority of life is centered around oxygen. It is a byproduct of photosynthesis and it is subsequently used by other forms of life to breathe. Oxygen is also readily detectable in spectra, with multiple bands across a relatively wide wavelength range, therefore it makes a very good biosignature. However, finding oxygen alone in a planet's atmosphere is not enough to confirm a biosignature because of the false-positive mechanisms associated with it. One possibility is that oxygen can build up abiotically via photolysis if there is a low inventory of non-condensible gasses or if it loses a lot of water. Finding and distinguishing a biosignature from its potential false-positive mechanisms is one of the most complicated parts of testing for viability because it relies on human ingenuity to break an abiotic-biological degeneracy, if nature allows.
Opposite to false positives, false negative biosignatures arise in a scenario where life may be present on another planet, but there are some processes on that planet that make potential biosignatures undetectable. This is an ongoing problem and area of research in the preparation for future telescopes that will be capable of observing exoplanetary atmospheres.
There are many ways in which humans may limit the viability of a potential biosignature. The resolution of a telescope becomes important when vetting certain false-positive mechanisms, and many current telescopes do not have the capabilities to observe at the resolution needed to investigate some of these. In addition, probes and telescopes are worked on by huge collaborations of scientists with varying interests. As a result, new probes and telescopes carry a variety of instruments that are compromises to everyone's unique inputs. In order for a different type of scientist to be able to detect something not related to biosignatures, a sacrifice may have to be made in the capability of an instrument to search for biosignatures.
The ancient record on Earth provides an opportunity to see what geochemical signatures are produced by microbial life and how these signatures are preserved over geologic time. Some related disciplines such as geochemistry, geobiology, and geomicrobiology often use biosignatures to determine if living organisms are or were present in a sample. These possible biosignatures include: (a) microfossils and stromatolites; (b) molecular structures (biomarkers) and isotopic compositions of carbon, nitrogen and hydrogen in organic matter; (c) multiple sulfur and oxygen isotope ratios of minerals; and (d) abundance relationships and isotopic compositions of redox sensitive metals (e.g., Fe, Mo, Cr, and rare earth elements).
Life processes may produce a range of biosignatures such as nucleic acids, lipids, proteins, amino acids, kerogen-like material and various morphological features that are detectable in rocks and sediments.Microbes often interact with geochemical processes, leaving features in the rock record indicative of biosignatures. For example, bacterial micrometer-sized pores in carbonate rocks resemble inclusions under transmitted light, but have distinct size, shapes and patterns (swirling or dendritic) and are distributed differently from common fluid inclusions. A potential biosignature is a phenomenon that may have been produced by life, but for which alternate abiotic origins may also be possible.
Some researchers suggested that these microscopic structures on the Martian ALH84001 meteorite could be fossilized bacteria.
Another possible biosignature might be morphology since the shape and size of certain objects may potentially indicate the presence of past or present life. For example, microscopic magnetite crystals in the Martian meteoriteALH84001 are one of the longest-debated of several potential biosignatures in that specimen. The possible biomineral studied in the Martian ALH84001 meteorite includes putative microbial fossils, tiny rock-like structures whose shape was a potential biosignature because it resembled known bacteria. Most scientists ultimately concluded that these were far too small to be fossilized cells. A consensus that has emerged from these discussions, and is now seen as a critical requirement, is the demand for further lines of evidence in addition to any morphological data that supports such extraordinary claims. Currently, the scientific consensus is that "morphology alone cannot be used unambiguously as a tool for primitive life detection." Interpretation of morphology is notoriously subjective, and its use alone has led to numerous errors of interpretation.
No single compound will prove life once existed. Rather, it will be distinctive patterns present in any organic compounds showing a process of selection. For example, membrane lipids left behind by degraded cells will be concentrated, have a limited size range, and comprise an even number of carbons. Similarly, life only uses left-handed amino acids. Biosignatures need not be chemical, however, and can also be suggested by a distinctive magnetic biosignature.
On Mars, surface oxidants and UV radiation will have altered or destroyed organic molecules at or near the surface. One issue that may add ambiguity in such a search is the fact that, throughout Martian history, abiogenic organic-rich chondritic meteorites have undoubtedly rained upon the Martian surface. At the same time, strong oxidants in Martian soil along with exposure to ionizing radiation might alter or destroy molecular signatures from meteorites or organisms. An alternative approach would be to seek concentrations of buried crystalline minerals, such as clays and evaporites, which may protect organic matter from the destructive effects of ionizing radiation and strong oxidants. The search for Martian biosignatures has become
more promising due to the discovery that surface and near-surface aqueous environments existed on Mars at the same time when biological organic matter was being preserved in ancient aqueous sediments on Earth.
The atmospheric properties of exoplanets are of particular importance, as atmospheres provide the most likely observables for the near future, including habitability indicators and biosignatures. Over billions of years, the processes of life on a planet would result in a mixture of chemicals unlike anything that could form in an ordinary chemical equilibrium. For example, large amounts of oxygen and small amounts of methane are generated by life on Earth.
An exoplanet's color—or reflectance spectrum—can also be used as a biosignature due to the effect of pigments that are uniquely biologic in origin such as the pigments of phototrophic and photosynthetic life forms. Scientists use the Earth as an example of this when looked at from far away (see Pale Blue Dot) as a comparison to worlds observed outside of our solar system. Ultraviolet radiation on life forms could also induce biofluorescence in visible wavelengths that may be detected by the new generation of space observatories under development.
Some scientists have reported methods of detecting hydrogen and methane in extraterrestrial atmospheres. Habitability indicators and biosignatures must be interpreted within a planetary and environmental context. For example, the presence of oxygen and methane together could indicate the kind of extreme thermochemical disequilibrium generated by life. Two of the top 14,000 proposed atmospheric biosignatures are dimethyl sulfide and chloromethane (CH 3Cl). An alternative biosignature is the combination of methane and carbon dioxide.
Methane (CH4) on Mars - potential sources and sinks.
The presence of methane in the atmosphere of Mars is an area of ongoing research and a highly contentious subject. Because of its tendency to be destroyed in the atmosphere by photochemistry, the presence of excess methane on a planet can be an indication that there must be an active source. With life being the strongest source of methane on Earth, observing a disequilibrium in the methane abundance on another planet could be a viable biosignature.
Since 2004, there have been several detections of methane in the Mars atmosphere by a variety of instruments onboard orbiters and ground-based landers on the Martian surface as well as Earth-based telescopes. These missions reported values anywhere between a 'background level' ranging between 0.24 and 0.65 parts per billion by volume (p.p.b.v.) to as much as 45 ± 10 p.p.b.v.
However, recent measurements using the ACS and NOMAD instruments on board the ESA-Roscosmos ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter have failed to detect any methane over a range of latitudes and longitudes on both Martian hemispheres. These highly sensitive instruments were able to put an upper bound on the overall methane abundance at 0.05 p.p.b.v. This nondetection is a major contradiction to what was previously observed with less sensitive instruments and will remain a strong argument in the ongoing debate over the presence of methane in the Martian atmosphere.
Furthermore, current photochemical models cannot explain the presence of methane in the atmosphere of Mars and its reported rapid variations in space and time. Neither its fast appearance nor disappearance can be explained yet. To rule out a biogenic origin for the methane, a future probe or lander hosting a mass spectrometer will be needed, as the isotopic proportions of carbon-12 to carbon-14 in methane could distinguish between a biogenic and non-biogenic origin, similarly to the use of the δ13C standard for recognizing biogenic methane on Earth.
Biogenic methane production is the main contributor to the methane flux coming from the surface of Earth. Methane has a photochemical sink in the atmosphere but will build up if the flux is high enough. If there is detectable methane in the atmosphere of another planet, especially with a host star of G or K type, this may be interpreted as a viable biosignature.
A disequilibrium in the abundances of gas species in an atmosphere can be interpreted as a biosignature. On Earth, life has greatly altered the atmosphere in a way that would be unlikely for any other processes to replicate. Therefore, a departure from equilibrium is evidence for a biosignature. For example, the abundance of methane in the Earth's atmosphere is orders of magnitude above the equilibrium value due to the constant methane flux that life on the surface emits. Depending on the host star, a disequilibrium in the methane abundance on another planet may indicate a biosignature.
Because the only form of known life is that on Earth, the search for biosignatures is heavily influenced by the products that life produces on Earth. However, life that is different than life on Earth may still produce biosignatures that are detectable by humans, even though nothing is known about their specific biology. This form of biosignature is called an "agnostic biosignature" because it is independent of the form of life that produces it. It is widely agreed that all life–no matter how different it is from life on Earth–needs a source of energy to thrive. This must involve some sort of chemical disequilibrium, which can be exploited for metabolism. Geological processes are independent of life, and if scientists are able to constrain the geology well enough on another planet, then they know what the particular geologic equilibrium for that planet should be. A deviation from geological equilibrium can be interpreted as both an atmospheric disequilibrium and agnostic biosignature.
In the same way that detecting a biosignature would be an incredibly important discovery about a planet, finding evidence that life is not present can be an important discovery about a planet as well. Life relies on redox imbalances to metabolize the resources available into energy. The evidence that nothing on a planet is taking advantage of the "free lunch" available due to an observed redox imbalance is called antibiosignatures.
The Martian atmosphere contains high abundances of photochemically produced CO and H2, which are reducing molecules. Mars' atmosphere is otherwise mostly oxidizing, leading to a source of untapped energy that life could exploit if it used a metabolism compatible with one or both of these reducing molecules. Because these molecules can be observed, scientists use this as evidence for an antibiosignature. Scientists have used this concept as an argument against life on Mars.
Missions inside our solar system
Astrobiological exploration is founded upon the premise that biosignatures encountered in space will be recognizable as extraterrestrial life. The usefulness of a biosignature is determined not only by the probability of life creating it but also by the improbability of non-biological (abiotic) processes producing it. Concluding that evidence of an extraterrestrial life form (past or present) has been discovered requires proving that a possible biosignature was produced by the activities or remains of life. As with most scientific discoveries, discovery of a biosignature will require evidence building up until no other explanation exists.
Possible examples of a biosignature include complex organic molecules or structures whose formation is virtually unachievable in the absence of life:
The Curiosity rover from the Mars Science Laboratory mission, with its Curiosity rover is currently assessing the potential past and present habitability of the Martian environment and is attempting to detect biosignatures on the surface of Mars. Considering the MSL instrument payload package, the following classes of biosignatures are within the MSL detection window: organism morphologies (cells, body fossils, casts), biofabrics (including microbial mats), diagnostic organic molecules, isotopic signatures, evidence of biomineralization and bioalteration, spatial patterns in chemistry, and biogenic gases. The Curiosity rover targets outcrops to maximize the probability of detecting 'fossilized' organic matter preserved in sedimentary deposits.
The 2016 ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter (TGO) is a Mars telecommunications orbiter and atmospheric gas analyzer mission. It delivered the Schiaparelli EDM lander and then began to settle into its science orbit to map the sources of methane on Mars and other gases, and in doing so, will help select the landing site for the ExoMars rover to be launched in 2022. The primary objective of the ExoMars rover mission is the search for biosignatures on the surface and subsurface by using a drill able to collect samples down to a depth of 2 metres (6.6 ft), away from the destructive radiation that bathes the surface.
Mars 2020 Rover
The Mars 2020 rover, which launched in 2020, is intended to investigate an astrobiologically relevant ancient environment on Mars, investigate its surface geological processes and history, including the assessment of its past habitability, the possibility of past life on Mars, and potential for preservation of biosignatures within accessible geological materials. In addition, it will cache the most interesting samples for possible future transport to Earth.
NASA's Dragonfly lander/aircraft concept is proposed to launch in 2025 and would seek evidence of biosignatures on the organic-rich surface and atmosphere of Titan, as well as study its possible prebiotic primordial soup. Titan is the largest moon of Saturn and is widely believed to have a large subsurface ocean consisting of a salty brine. In addition, scientists believe that Titan may have the conditions necessary to promote prebiotic chemistry, making it a prime candidate for biosignature discovery.
NASA's Europa Clipper probe is designed as a flyby mission to Jupiter's smallest Galilean moon, Europa. Set to launch in 2024, this probe will investigate the potential for habitability on Europa. Europa is one of the best candidates for biosignature discovery in our solar system because of the scientific consensus that it retains a subsurface ocean, with two to three times the volume of water on Earth. Evidence for this subsurface ocean includes:
Voyager 1 (1979): The first ever close-up photos of Europa are taken. Scientists propose that the tectonic-like marks on the surface could be caused by a subsurface ocean.
Galileo (1997): The magnetometer aboard this probe detected a subtle change in the magnetic field near Europa. This was later interpreted as a disruption in the expected magnetic field due to the induction of current in a conducting layer on Europa. The composition of this conducting layer is consistent with a salty subsurface ocean.
The Europa Clipper probe will carry instruments to help confirm the existence and composition of a subsurface ocean and thick icy layer. In addition, it will map the surface to study features that may point to tectonic activity due to a subsurface ocean.
An image of the plumes of water and ice coming from the surface of Enceladus. Future missions will investigate these geysers to determine the composition and look for signs of life.
Although there are no set plans to search for biosignatures on Saturn's sixth-largest moon, Enceladus, the prospects of biosignature discovery there are exciting enough to warrant several mission concepts that may be funded in the future. Similar to Jupiter's moon Europa, there is much evidence for a subsurface ocean to exist on Enceladus as well. Plumes of water vapor were first observed in 2005 by the Cassini mission and were later determined to contain salt as well as organic compounds. In 2014, more evidence was presented using gravimetric measurements on Enceladus to conclude that there is in fact a large reservoir of water underneath an icy surface. Mission design concepts include:
Testing the Habitability of Enceladus's Ocean (THEO)
All of these concept missions have similar science goals: To assess the habitability of Enceladus and search for biosignatures, in line with the strategic map for exploring the ocean-world Enceladus.
Searching outside of our solar system
At 4.2 light-years (1.3 parsecs, 40 trillion km, or 25 trillion miles) away from Earth, the closest potentially habitable exoplanet is Proxima Centauri b, which was discovered in 2016. This means it would take more than 18,100 years to get there if a vessel could consistently travel as fast as the Juno spacecraft (250,000 kilometers per hour or 150,000 miles per hour). In other words, it is currently not feasible to send humans or even probes to search for biosignatures outside of our solar system. Given this fact, the only way to search for biosignatures outside of our solar system is by observing exoplanets with telescopes.
To date, there have been no plausible or confirmed biosignature detections outside of our solar system. Despite this, it is a rapidly growing field of research due to the prospects of the next generation of telescopes. The James Webb Space Telescope, set to launch into space in autumn 2021, will be a promising next step in the search for biosignatures. Although its wavelength range and resolution will not be compatible with some of the more important atmospheric biosignature gas bands like oxygen, it will still be able to detect some evidence for oxygen false positive mechanisms.
The new generation of ground-based 30-meter class telescopes (Thirty Meter Telescope and Extremely Large Telescope) will have the ability to take high-resolution spectra of exoplanet atmospheres at a variety of wavelengths. These telescopes will be capable of distinguishing some of the more difficult false positive mechanisms such as the abiotic buildup of oxygen via photolysis. In addition, their large collecting area will enable high angular resolution, making direct imaging studies more feasible.
^ abcSteele; Beaty; et al. (September 26, 2006). "Final report of the MEPAG Astrobiology Field Laboratory Science Steering Group (AFL-SSG)" (.doc). The Astrobiology Field Laboratory. U.S.A.: the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG) - NASA. p. 72.
^"Biosignature - definition". Science Dictionary. 2011. Archived from the original on 2010-03-16. Retrieved 2011-01-12.
^ abcdefgSummons RE, Amend JP, Bish D, Buick R, Cody GD, Des Marais DJ, et al. (March 2011). "Preservation of martian organic and environmental records: final report of the Mars biosignature working group" (PDF). Astrobiology. 11 (2): 157–81. Bibcode:2011AsBio..11..157S. doi:10.1089/ast.2010.0506. hdl:1721.1/66519. PMID21417945. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-11-28. Retrieved 2013-06-22.
^Frank, Adam (31 December 2020). "A new frontier is opening in the search for extraterrestrial life - The reason we haven't found life elsewhere in the universe is simple: We haven't really looked until now". The Washington Post. Retrieved 1 January 2021.
^Seager S, Schrenk M, Bains W (January 2012). "An astrophysical view of Earth-based metabolic biosignature gases". Astrobiology. 12 (1): 61–82. Bibcode:2012AsBio..12...61S. doi:10.1089/ast.2010.0489. hdl:1721.1/73073. PMID22269061.
^Meadows VS (October 2017). "2 as a Biosignature in Exoplanetary Atmospheres". Astrobiology. 17 (10): 1022–1052. doi:10.1089/ast.2016.1578. PMC5655594. PMID28443722.
^ abMeadows VS, Reinhard CT, Arney GN, Parenteau MN, Schwieterman EW, Domagal-Goldman SD, et al. (June 2018). "Exoplanet Biosignatures: Understanding Oxygen as a Biosignature in the Context of Its Environment". Astrobiology. 18 (6): 630–662. arXiv:1705.07560. Bibcode:2018AsBio..18..630M. doi:10.1089/ast.2017.1727. PMC6014580. PMID29746149.
^Ver Eecke HC, Butterfield DA, Huber JA, Lilley MD, Olson EJ, Roe KK, et al. (August 2012). "Hydrogen-limited growth of hyperthermophilic methanogens at deep-sea hydrothermal vents". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 109 (34): 13674–9. Bibcode:2012PNAS..10913674V. doi:10.1073/pnas.1206632109. PMC3427048. PMID22869718.
^ abSzostak J (May 2018). "How Did Life Begin?". Nature. 557 (7704): S13–S15. Bibcode:2018Natur.557S..13S. doi:10.1038/d41586-018-05098-w. PMID29743709.
^University of New South Wales (May 9, 2017). "Oldest evidence of life on land found in 3.48-billion-year-old Australian rocks". Phys.org. Retrieved 2019-06-12.
^Ward, Colin R.; Walter, Malcolm R.; Campbell, Kathleen A.; Kranendonk, Martin J. Van; Djokic, Tara (2017-05-09). "Earliest signs of life on land preserved in ca. 3.5 Ga hot spring deposits". Nature Communications. 8: 15263. Bibcode:2017NatCo...815263D. doi:10.1038/ncomms15263. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC5436104. PMID28486437.
^Luger R, Barnes R (February 2015). "Extreme water loss and abiotic O2 buildup on planets throughout the habitable zones of M dwarfs". Astrobiology. 15 (2): 119–43. arXiv:1411.7412. Bibcode:2015AsBio..15..119L. doi:10.1089/ast.2014.1231. PMC4323125. PMID25629240.
^Wordsworth, Robin; Pierrehumbert, Raymond (1 April 2014). "Abiotic oxygen-dominated atmospheres on terrestrial habitable zone planets". The Astrophysical Journal. 785 (2): L20. arXiv:1403.2713. Bibcode:2014ApJ...785L..20W. doi:10.1088/2041-8205/785/2/L20. S2CID 17414970.
^Reinhard, Christopher T.; Olson, Stephanie L.; Schwieterman, Edward W.; Lyons, Timothy W. (April 2017). "False Negatives for Remote Life Detection on Ocean-Bearing Planets: Lessons from the Early Earth". Astrobiology. 17 (4): 287–297. arXiv:1702.01137. Bibcode:2017AsBio..17..287R. doi:10.1089/ast.2016.1598. PMC5399744. PMID28418704.
^Council, National Research (2010-08-13). New Worlds, New Horizons in Astronomy and Astrophysics. ISBN 9780309157995.
^"SIGNATURES OF LIFE FROM EARTH AND BEYOND". Penn State Astrobiology Research Center (PSARC). Penn State. 2009. Retrieved 2011-01-14.
^Tenenbaum, David (July 30, 2008). "Reading Archaean Biosignatures". NASA. Archived from the original on November 29, 2014. Retrieved 2014-11-23.
^"Fatty alcohols". Archived from the original on 2012-06-25. Retrieved 2006-04-01.
^ abBeegle LW, Wilson MG, Abilleira F, Jordan JF, Wilson GR (August 2007). "A concept for NASA's Mars 2016 astrobiology field laboratory". Astrobiology. 7 (4): 545–77. Bibcode:2007AsBio...7..545B. doi:10.1089/ast.2007.0153. PMID17723090. S2CID 7127896.
^Bosak, Tanja; Souza-Egipsy, Virginia; Corsetti, Frank A.; Newman, Dianne K. (2004). "Micrometer-scale porosity as a biosignature in carbonate crusts". Geology. 32 (9): 781. Bibcode:2004Geo....32..781B. doi:10.1130/G20681.1.
^Crenson M (2006-08-06). "After 10 years, few believe life on Mars". Associated Press (on usatoday.com). Retrieved 2009-12-06.
^ abMcKay DS, Gibson EK, Thomas-Keprta KL, Vali H, Romanek CS, Clemett SJ, et al. (August 1996). "Search for past life on Mars: possible relic biogenic activity in martian meteorite ALH84001". Science. 273 (5277): 924–30. Bibcode:1996Sci...273..924M. doi:10.1126/science.273.5277.924. PMID8688069. S2CID 40690489.
^Friedmann EI, Wierzchos J, Ascaso C, Winklhofer M (February 2001). "Chains of magnetite crystals in the meteorite ALH84001: evidence of biological origin". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 98 (5): 2176–81. doi:10.1073/pnas.051514698. PMC30112. PMID11226212.
^Thomas-Keprta KL, Clemett SJ, Bazylinski DA, Kirschvink JL, McKay DS, Wentworth SJ, et al. (February 2001). "Truncated hexa-octahedral magnetite crystals in ALH84001: presumptive biosignatures". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 98 (5): 2164–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.051500898. PMC30110. PMID11226210.
^Choi CQ (August 2016). "Mars Life? 20 Years Later, Debate Over Meteorite Continues". Space.com. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^McSween HY (2019), "The Search for Biosignatures in Martian Meteorite Allan Hills 84001", in Cavalazzi B, Westall F (eds.), Biosignatures for Astrobiology, Advances in Astrobiology and Biogeophysics, Springer International Publishing, pp. 167–182, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96175-0_8, ISBN 9783319961750
^ abGarcia-Ruiz JG (December 30, 1999). "Morphological behavior of inorganic precipitation systems – Instruments, Methods, and Missions for Astrobiology II". SPIE Proceedings. Instruments, Methods, and Missions for Astrobiology II. Proc. SPIE 3755: 74. doi:10.1117/12.375088. S2CID 84764520. It is concluded that "morphology cannot be used unambiguously as a tool for primitive life detection."
^Agresti; House; Jögi; Kudryavstev; McKeegan; Runnegar; Schopf; Wdowiak (3 December 2008). "Detection and geochemical characterization of Earth's earliest life". NASA Astrobiology Institute. NASA. Archived from the original on 23 January 2013. Retrieved 2013-01-15.
^Schopf JW, Kudryavtsev AB, Czaja AD, Tripathi AB (28 April 2007). "Evidence of Archean life: Stromatolites and microfossils" (PDF). Precambrian Research. 158 (3–4): 141–155. Bibcode:2007PreR..158..141S. doi:10.1016/j.precamres.2007.04.009. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-12-24. Retrieved 2013-01-15.
^ abCousins, Claire (5 January 2018). "Rover could discover life on Mars – here's what it would take to prove it". PhysOrg.
^Wall, Mike (13 December 2011). "Mars Life Hunt Could Look for Magnetic Clues". Space.com. Retrieved 2011-12-15.
^"Artificial Life Shares Biosignature With Terrestrial Cousins". The Physics arXiv Blog. MIT. 10 January 2011. Retrieved 2011-01-14.
^ abSeager S, Bains W, Petkowski JJ (June 2016). "Toward a List of Molecules as Potential Biosignature Gases for the Search for Life on Exoplanets and Applications to Terrestrial Biochemistry" (PDF). Astrobiology. 16 (6): 465–85. Bibcode:2016AsBio..16..465S. doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1404. hdl:1721.1/109943. PMID27096351.
^DasSarma, Shiladitya; Schwieterman, Edward W. (2018). "Early evolution of purple retinal pigments on Earth and implications for exoplanet biosignatures". International Journal of Astrobiology. 20 (3): 1–10. arXiv:1810.05150. Bibcode:2018arXiv181005150D. doi:10.1017/S1473550418000423. ISSN 1473-5504. S2CID 119341330.
^Berdyugina SV, Kuhn J, Harrington D, Santl-Temkiv T, Messersmith EJ (January 2016). "Remote sensing of life: polarimetric signatures of photosynthetic pigments as sensitive biomarkers". International Journal of Astrobiology. 15 (1): 45–56. Bibcode:2016IJAsB..15...45B. doi:10.1017/S1473550415000129.
^Hegde S, Paulino-Lima IG, Kent R, Kaltenegger L, Rothschild L (March 2015). "Surface biosignatures of exo-earths: remote detection of extraterrestrial life". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 112 (13): 3886–91. Bibcode:2015PNAS..112.3886H. doi:10.1073/pnas.1421237112. PMC4386386. PMID25775594.
^Cofield C (30 March 2015). "Catalog of Earth Microbes Could Help Find Alien Life". Space.com. Retrieved 2015-05-11.
^Claudi, R.; Erculiani, M. S.; Galletta, G.; Billi, D.; Pace, E.; Schierano, D.; Giro, E.; D'Alessandro, M. (20 May 2015). "Simulating super earth atmospheres in the laboratory". International Journal of Astrobiology. 15 (1): 35–44. doi:10.1017/S1473550415000117. S2CID 125008098.
^Krissansen-Totton J, Schwieterman EW, Charnay B, Arney G, Robinson TD, Meadows V, Catling DC (January 2016). "Is the Pale Blue Dot unique? Optimized photometric bands for identifying Earth-like exoplanets". The Astrophysical Journal. 817 (1): 31. arXiv:1512.00502. Bibcode:2016ApJ...817...31K. doi:10.3847/0004-637X/817/1/31. S2CID 119211858.
^O'Malley-James, Jack T; Kaltenegger, Lisa (2019). "Biofluorescent Worlds – II. Biological fluorescence induced by stellar UV flares, a new temporal biosignature". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 488 (4): 4530–4545. arXiv:1608.06930. Bibcode:2019MNRAS.488.4530O. doi:10.1093/mnras/stz1842. S2CID 118394043.
^Brogi M, Snellen IA, de Kok RJ, Albrecht S, Birkby J, de Mooij EJ (June 2012). "The signature of orbital motion from the dayside of the planet τ Boötis b". Nature. 486 (7404): 502–4. arXiv:1206.6109. Bibcode:2012Natur.486..502B. doi:10.1038/nature11161. PMID22739313. S2CID 4368217.
^Mann, Adam (June 27, 2012). "New View of Exoplanets Will Aid Search for E.T." Wired. Retrieved June 28, 2012.
^Where are they? (PDF) Mario Livio and Joseph Silk. Physics Today, March 2017.
^Wall, Mike (24 January 2018). "Alien Life Hunt: Oxygen Isn't the Only Possible Sign of Life". Space.com. Retrieved 24 January 2018.
^Krissansen-Totton J, Olson S, Catlig DC (24 January 2018). "Disequilibrium biosignatures over Earth history and implications for detecting exoplanet life". Science Advances. 4 (1, eaao5747): eaao5747. arXiv:1801.08211. Bibcode:2018SciA....4.5747K. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aao5747. PMC5787383. PMID29387792.
^ abcLovelock JE (August 1965). "A physical basis for life detection experiments". Nature. 207 (997): 568–70. Bibcode:1965Natur.207..568L. doi:10.1038/207568a0. PMID5883628. S2CID 33821197.
^ abcHitchcock DR, Lovelock JE (1967-01-01). "Life detection by atmospheric analysis". Icarus. 7 (1): 149–159. Bibcode:1967Icar....7..149H. doi:10.1016/0019-1035(67)90059-0. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Krasnopolsky VA, Maillard JP, Owen TC (2004-12-01). "Detection of methane in the martian atmosphere: evidence for life?". Icarus. 172 (2): 537–547. Bibcode:2004Icar..172..537K. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2004.07.004. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Formisano V, Atreya S, Encrenaz T, Ignatiev N, Giuranna M (December 2004). "Detection of methane in the atmosphere of Mars". Science. 306 (5702): 1758–61. Bibcode:2004Sci...306.1758F. doi:10.1126/science.1101732. PMID15514118. S2CID 13533388.
^Mumma MJ, Villanueva GL, Novak RE, Hewagama T, Bonev BP, Disanti MA, et al. (February 2009). "Strong release of methane on Mars in northern summer 2003". Science. 323 (5917): 1041–5. Bibcode:2009Sci...323.1041M. doi:10.1126/science.1165243. PMID19150811. S2CID 25083438.
^Krasnopolsky VA (2012-01-01). "Search for methane and upper limits to ethane and SO2 on Mars". Icarus. 217 (1): 144–152. Bibcode:2012Icar..217..144K. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2011.10.019. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Webster CR, Mahaffy PR, Atreya SK, Flesch GJ, Mischna MA, Meslin PY, et al. (January 2015). "Mars atmosphere. Mars methane detection and variability at Gale crater" (PDF). Science. 347 (6220): 415–7. Bibcode:2015Sci...347..415W. doi:10.1126/science.1261713. PMID25515120. S2CID 20304810.
^Amoroso M, Merritt D, Parra JM, Cardesín-Moinelo A, Aoki S, Wolkenberg P, Alessandro Aronica, Formisano V, Oehler D (May 2019). "Independent confirmation of a methane spike on Mars and a source region east of Gale Crater". Nature Geoscience. 12 (5): 326–332. Bibcode:2019NatGe..12..326G. doi:10.1038/s41561-019-0331-9. ISSN 1752-0908. S2CID 134110253.
^Webster CR, Mahaffy PR, Atreya SK, Moores JE, Flesch GJ, Malespin C, et al. (June 2018). "Background levels of methane in Mars' atmosphere show strong seasonal variations". Science. 360 (6393): 1093–1096. Bibcode:2018Sci...360.1093W. doi:10.1126/science.aaq0131. PMID29880682.
^Mumma MJ, Villanueva GL, Novak RE, Hewagama T, Bonev BP, Disanti MA, et al. (February 2009). "Strong release of methane on Mars in northern summer 2003". Science. 323 (5917): 1041–5. Bibcode:2009Sci...323.1041M. doi:10.1126/science.1165243. PMID19150811. S2CID 25083438.
^Korablev O, Vandaele AC, Montmessin F, Fedorova AA, Trokhimovskiy A, Forget F, et al. (April 2019). "No detection of methane on Mars from early ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter observations" (PDF). Nature. 568 (7753): 517–520. Bibcode:2019Natur.568..517K. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1096-4. PMID30971829. S2CID 106411228.
^ abZahnle K, Freedman RS, Catling DC (2011-04-01). "Is there methane on Mars?". Icarus. 212 (2): 493–503. Bibcode:2011Icar..212..493Z. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2010.11.027. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Mars Trace Gas Mission Archived 2011-07-21 at the Wayback Machine (September 10, 2009)
^Remote Sensing Tutorial, Section 19-13a Archived 2011-10-21 at the Wayback Machine - Missions to Mars during the Third Millennium, Nicholas M. Short, Sr., et al., NASA
^Arney, Giada N. (March 2019). "The K Dwarf Advantage for Biosignatures on Directly Imaged Exoplanets". The Astrophysical Journal. 873 (1): L7. arXiv:2001.10458. Bibcode:2019ApJ...873L...7A. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0651. ISSN 2041-8205. S2CID 127742050.
^ abKrissansen-Totton J, Bergsman DS, Catling DC (January 2016). "On Detecting Biospheres from Chemical Thermodynamic Disequilibrium in Planetary Atmospheres". Astrobiology. 16 (1): 39–67. arXiv:1503.08249. Bibcode:2016AsBio..16...39K. doi:10.1089/ast.2015.1327. PMID26789355. S2CID 26959254.
^Lovelock James Ephraim; Kaplan I. R.; Pirie Norman Wingate (1975-05-06). "Thermodynamics and the recognition of alien biospheres". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B. Biological Sciences. 189 (1095): 167–181. Bibcode:1975RSPSB.189..167L. doi:10.1098/rspb.1975.0051. S2CID 129105448.
^Krissansen-Totton J, Arney GN, Catling DC (April 2018). "Constraining the climate and ocean pH of the early Earth with a geological carbon cycle model". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 115 (16): 4105–4110. arXiv:1804.00763. Bibcode:2018PNAS..115.4105K. doi:10.1073/pnas.1721296115. PMC5910859. PMID29610313.
^Arney, Giada N. (March 2019). "The K Dwarf Advantage for Biosignatures on Directly Imaged Exoplanets". The Astrophysical Journal. 873 (1): L7. arXiv:2001.10458. Bibcode:2019ApJ...873L...7A. doi:10.3847/2041-8213/ab0651. ISSN 2041-8205.
^National Academies Of Sciences Engineering; Division on Engineering Physical Sciences; Space Studies Board; Committee on Astrobiology Science Strategy for the Search for Life in the Universe (2019). Read "An Astrobiology Strategy for the Search for Life in the Universe" at NAP.edu. doi:10.17226/25252. ISBN 978-0-309-48416-9. PMID30986006.
^Catling DC, Krissansen-Totton J, Kiang NY, Crisp D, Robinson TD, DasSarma S, et al. (June 2018). "Exoplanet Biosignatures: A Framework for Their Assessment". Astrobiology. 18 (6): 709–738. arXiv:1705.06381. Bibcode:2018AsBio..18..709C. doi:10.1089/ast.2017.1737. PMC6049621. PMID29676932.
^Wang Y, Tian F, Li T, Hu Y (2016-03-01). "On the detection of carbon monoxide as an anti-biosignature in exoplanetary atmospheres". Icarus. 266: 15–23. Bibcode:2016Icar..266...15W. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2015.11.010. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Fortes AD (2000-08-01). "Exobiological Implications of a Possible Ammonia–Water Ocean inside Titan". Icarus. 146 (2): 444–452. Bibcode:2000Icar..146..444F. doi:10.1006/icar.2000.6400. ISSN 0019-1035.
^Grasset O, Sotin C, Deschamps F (2000-06-01). "On the internal structure and dynamics of Titan". Planetary and Space Science. 48 (7): 617–636. Bibcode:2000P&SS...48..617G. doi:10.1016/S0032-0633(00)00039-8. ISSN 0032-0633.
^"NASA team investigates complex chemistry at Titan". phys.org. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Desai, Ravi. "Saturn's moon Titan may harbour simple life forms – and reveal how organisms first formed on Earth". The Conversation. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Gudipati MS, Jacovi R, Couturier-Tamburelli I, Lignell A, Allen M (2013-04-03). "Photochemical activity of Titan's low-altitude condensed haze". Nature Communications. 4: 1648. Bibcode:2013NatCo...4.1648G. doi:10.1038/ncomms2649. PMID23552063.
^Smith BA, Soderblom LA, Johnson TV, Ingersoll AP, Collins SA, Shoemaker EM, et al. (June 1979). "The jupiter system through the eyes of voyager 1". Science. 204 (4396): 951–72. Bibcode:1979Sci...204..951S. doi:10.1126/science.204.4396.951. PMID17800430. S2CID 33147728.
^Kivelson MG, Khurana KK, Russell CT, Volwerk M, Walker RJ, Zimmer C (August 2000). "Galileo magnetometer measurements: a stronger case for a subsurface ocean at Europa". Science. 289 (5483): 1340–3. Bibcode:2000Sci...289.1340K. doi:10.1126/science.289.5483.1340. PMID10958778. S2CID 44381312.
^email@example.com. "Hubble discovers water vapour venting from Jupiter's moon Europa". www.spacetelescope.org. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^firstname.lastname@example.org. "Photo composite of suspected water plumes on Europa". www.spacetelescope.org. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Porco CC, Helfenstein P, Thomas PC, Ingersoll AP, Wisdom J, West R, et al. (March 2006). "Cassini observes the active south pole of Enceladus" (PDF). Science. 311 (5766): 1393–401. Bibcode:2006Sci...311.1393P. doi:10.1126/science.1123013. PMID16527964. S2CID 6976648.
^esa. "Enceladus rains water onto Saturn". European Space Agency. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Postberg F, Schmidt J, Hillier J, Kempf S, Srama R (June 2011). "A salt-water reservoir as the source of a compositionally stratified plume on Enceladus". Nature. 474 (7353): 620–2. Bibcode:2011Natur.474..620P. doi:10.1038/nature10175. PMID21697830. S2CID 4400807.
^esa. "Cassini samples the icy spray of Enceladus' water plumes". European Space Agency. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Witze, Alexandra (2014). "Icy Enceladus hides a watery ocean". Nature News. doi:10.1038/nature.2014.14985. S2CID 131145017.
^Iess, L.; Stevenson, D. J.; Parisi, M.; Hemingway, D.; Jacobson, R.A.; Lunine, Jonathan I.; Nimmo, F.; Armstrong, J. W.; Asmar, S. W.; Ducci, M.; Tortora, P. (April 4, 2014). "The Gravity Field and Interior Structure of Enceladus" (PDF). Science. 344 (6179): 78–80. Bibcode:2014Sci...344...78I. doi:10.1126/science.1250551. PMID24700854. S2CID 28990283.
^Amos, Jonathan (2014-04-03). "Saturn moon hides 'great lake'". Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Reh, K.; Spilker, L.; Lunine, Jonathan I.; Waite, Jr., Jack Hunter; Cable, M. L.; Postberg, Frank; Clark, K. (March 2016). "Enceladus Life Finder: The search for life in a habitable Moon". 2016 IEEE Aerospace Conference: 1–8. doi:10.1109/AERO.2016.7500813. ISBN 978-1-4673-7676-1. S2CID 22950150.CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
^Clark, Stephen (2015-04-06). "Diverse destinations considered for new interplanetary probe". Spaceflight Now. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^"Future Planetary Exploration: Proposed New Frontiers Missions". Future Planetary Exploration. 2017-08-04. Archived from the original on 2017-09-20. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^Konstantinidis, Konstantinos; Flores Martinez, Claudio L.; Dachwald, Bernd; Ohndorf, Andreas; Dykta, Paul; Bowitz, Pascal; Rudolph, Martin; Digel, Ilya; Kowalski, Julia; Voigt, Konstantin; Förstner, Roger (January 2015). "A lander mission to probe subglacial water on Saturn׳s moon Enceladus for life". Acta Astronautica. 106: 63–89. Bibcode:2015AcAau.106...63K. doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2014.09.012.
^"E2T - Explorer of Enceladus and Titan". E2T - Explorer of Enceladus and Titan. Retrieved 2019-06-07.
^VoosenJan. 4, Paul; 2017; Pm, 1:45 (2017-01-04). "Updated: NASA taps missions to tiny metal world and Jupiter Trojans". Science | AAAS. Retrieved 2019-06-07.CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
^Tsou P, Brownlee DE, McKay CP, Anbar AD, Yano H, Altwegg K, et al. (August 2012). "LIFE: Life Investigation For Enceladus A Sample Return Mission Concept in Search for Evidence of Life". Astrobiology. 12 (8): 730–42. Bibcode:2012AsBio..12..730T. doi:10.1089/ast.2011.0813. PMID22970863. S2CID 34375065.
^MacKenzie SM, Caswell TE, Phillips-Lander CM, Stavros EN, Hofgartner JD, Sun VZ, Powell KE, Steuer CJ, O'Rourke JG, Dhaliwal JK, Leung CW (2016-09-15). "THEO concept mission: Testing the Habitability of Enceladus's Ocean". Advances in Space Research. 58 (6): 1117–1137. arXiv:1605.00579. Bibcode:2016AdSpR..58.1117M. doi:10.1016/j.asr.2016.05.037. ISSN 0273-1177. S2CID 119112894.
^Sherwood B (2016-09-01). "Strategic map for exploring the ocean-world Enceladus". Acta Astronautica. Space Flight Safety. 126: 52–58. Bibcode:2016AcAau.126...52S. doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2016.04.013. ISSN 0094-5765.
^Anglada-Escudé, Guillem; Amado, Pedro J.; Barnes, John; et al. (2016). "A terrestrial planet candidate in a temperate orbit around Proxima Centauri". Nature. 536 (7617): 437–440. arXiv:1609.03449. Bibcode:2016Natur.536..437A. doi:10.1038/nature19106. PMID27558064. S2CID 4451513.
^Meadows VS, Arney GN, Schwieterman EW, Lustig-Yaeger J, Lincowski AP, Robinson T, et al. (February 2018). "The Habitability of Proxima Centauri b: Environmental States and Observational Discriminants". Astrobiology. 18 (2): 133–189. arXiv:1608.08620. Bibcode:2018AsBio..18..133M. doi:10.1089/ast.2016.1589. PMC5820795. PMID29431479.
^"How Fast Can Juno Go?". Mission Juno. Retrieved 2019-06-08.
^Lincowski AP, Meadows VS, Lustig-Yaeger J (2019-05-17). "The Detectability and Characterization of the TRAPPIST-1 Exoplanet Atmospheres with JWST". The Astronomical Journal. 158 (1): 27. arXiv:1905.07070v1. Bibcode:2019AJ....158...27L. doi:10.3847/1538-3881/ab21e0. S2CID 158046684.
^Crossfield IJ (2016-04-21). "Exoplanet Atmospheres and Giant Ground-Based Telescopes". arXiv:1604.06458v1. Bibcode:2016arXiv160406458C. Cite journal requires |journal= (help)