Microbial growth in simulated Mars conditions could guide search for life

A new experiment reveals that Earth's microbes can grow in harsh conditions similar to what may exist just below the surface of Mars, suggesting new directions in the search for potential cellular life on the red planet. The microbes grew over months in just a fraction of Earth's normal atmospheric pressure, in a solution seven times saltier than seawater, while breathing chemicals similar to bleach. The study, led by University of Florida researcher Adam Robinson, tested whether a salt-loving microorganism could do more than survive several of the stresses associated with Mars. These include stresses that would exist on the surface and potentially in the subsurface. The microbe could reproduce and use chemicals in its surroundings to sustain its metabolism, although growth was substantially slower than in comparable cultures kept at Earth's atmospheric pressure. The scientists focused on Haloferax volcanii, a microbe known as an extremophile for its ability to tolerate extreme conditions here on Earth. They chose Haloferax because of its known preference for high-salt environments, similar to those found in the shallow Martian subsurface. The team, which was co-led by Scott Perl of the Los Angeles Natural History Museum and the Blue Marble Space Institute of Science, published its findings Nov. 5 in the journal Applied and Environmental Microbiology. Growth under combined Martian stresses: Past experiments have attempted to answer similar questions. Researchers have grown Earth microbes under individual stresses associated with Mars, including high salt concentrations or low pressure. Other studies have tested whether organisms remain alive after exposure to several harsh conditions at once, often for only hours or days. "Far fewer have been able to combine these conditions together and show that microorganisms can actively grow," Robinson said. For this experiment, the team kept cultures of Haloferax in oxygen-free, carbon dioxide-rich conditions for 160 days. The microbes were given nitrate or perchlorate, compounds relevant to Mars that they could use in place of oxygen during respiration. Cultures supplied with neither chemical remained viable but showed no measurable growth, helping the scientists distinguish survival from reproduction.

The results do not establish that life exists on Mars today. They do suggest that future missions searching beneath its surface should consider whether some environments could support active life, rather than looking only for evidence that life existed billions of years ago. The limits of the Mars simulation: The laboratory did not reproduce every condition the organisms would encounter on Mars. The cultures were held at 70 degrees Fahrenheit (21 degrees Celsius), while most of the Martian subsurface is far colder. They also received nutrients supplied by the researchers. And the liquid-water pockets they were designed to resemble have not been confirmed on Mars. "The environment that we're mimicking in this experiment has not been observed on Mars, but is theorized to exist," Robinson said. That distinction matters. The work also offers a way to test how microorganisms might behave in such environments, information that could help scientists design life-detection experiments and reduce the risk of carrying Earth microbes to Mars aboard spacecraft. "We are adding to the growing body of evidence suggesting that we should consider the possibility of life on Mars today," Robinson said.

• The study used Haloferax volcanii, a salt-loving microbe, in low-pressure, high-salt conditions.
• The experiment lasted 160 days and tested the microbe's ability to grow under Martian-like stresses.
• The team found that the microbe could reproduce but grew much slower than under normal Earth conditions.
• The simulation did not fully replicate Martian conditions, such as temperature and subsurface environments.
• The results suggest that future missions should consider whether environments beneat

AI-generated summary of the original article — see the source for the full story.