iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Seth Shostak

Seth Shostak

Posted: December 5, 2010 07:23 PM

Life, But Not As We Know It


"Arsenic and Old Lakes" is what Laurance Doyle, one of my colleagues at the SETI Institute, called NASA's much ballyhooed press conference last week.

It turned out that the subject of the new research was a microbe, colorfully named GFAJ-1, that can incorporate arsenic into its body chemistry. Interesting news, but not everyone felt that the story justified NASA's pre-release publicity, which suggested that the new research was a major milepost in the search for alien life.

Indeed, many thought that the agency's advance notice had wandered beyond the misty borders of "tantalizing" into the dangerous land of "hype." On the day before the press conference, my in-box bulged with dozens of inquiries about the upcoming revelations, asking whether NASA was about to tell us they had finally found proof of extraterrestrials. After all, if the research to be disclosed at the press event was not at least this dramatic, then why was the publicity overture so seductively coy?

When the news turned out to be about a terrestrial organism, many denizens of blog-land felt duped, and began to turn on the research itself. They questioned why NASA (which, as they helpfully noted, has the word "space" in its name) was shelling out taxpayer dough to examine pond scum in a California lake? And why was such a thoroughly earthly endeavor classified as "astrobiology" -- a discipline that sounds like the day job of the Enterprise's Science Officer?

But let's back up a minute. There's no doubt that the work by Felicia Wolfe-Simon is exceedingly cool. After all, it shatters another of those rules of nature that sounded good in high school, but turned out to be untrue (e.g., "matter can neither be created nor destroyed" or "all life falls into two kingdoms; plants and animals.") In this case, the sundered wisdom was that biology -- all biology -- is largely built of only six elements: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorous and sulfur (CHNOPS). This idea has been considered such a basic fundament of life, it was even part of the Arecibo radio message that was famously beamed into space three dozen years ago. There weren't a lot of things we could tell the aliens in that cramped transmission, but CHNOPS was one of them. (Actually, the sulfur was not mentioned, as it's not part of DNA.)

So from a biological perspective, the fact that these microbes could select arsenic, rather than conventional phosphorous, from the environmental menu is remarkable. If GFAJ-1 has actually incorporated arsenic into its DNA, then it has morphed -- at least temporarily -- into a different kind of biology.

Sci-fi has long entertained the idea of life-but-not-as-we-know-it. Mostly, it favors silicon-based life -- as much a staple of space opera as bulbous eyeballs. And silicon-based life makes at least some sense, since the element lies immediately beneath carbon in the periodic table. Consequently, its chemical deportment is closer to carbon than any other element.

Well, arsenic lies just below phosphorous in the table (indeed, its chemical similarity is -- at root -- the cause of its utility for chilling enemies of the Borgia family in renaissance Italy, not to mention obnoxious in-laws in the Victorian era.) But while sci-fi writers picked up on silicon, they don't seem to have proposed arsenic-based extraterrestrials.

And while it's true that the microbe studied by Wolfe-Simon and her colleagues, despite being able to use arsenic, still preferred phosphorous, the result is nonetheless remarkable. Indeed, it's akin to the joke about the talking dog: the surprise is not that it can do it well, but that it can do it at all.

The bottom line, and the reason why this work is both relevant and encouraging for the search for cosmic company is this: In our efforts to find extraterrestrial life, we can easily run into a confounding problem -- recognizing life when we see it. Of course, there won't be any difficulty knowing that we've found life if it's of the hairless, humorless Klingon variety. But it's safe to assume that the overwhelming majority of alien creatures will be microbes.

And frankly, recognizing a speck-sized species on another world is problematic. In 1976, NASA sent a very expensive and sophisticated pair of landers to the rusty, dusty surface of Mars. These robot biologists conducted several experiments to ascertain whether the martian soil might be laced with metabolizing life. But even today, the results are disputed -- and that's at least partially due to the fact that the landers were looking for life as we know it.

So forget the hype. The import of this story is that finding life as we don't know it in a California lake will give us a better shot at testing for biology on worlds that are, both by definition and in fact, truly alien.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 38
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:56 PM on 12/09/2010
It is completely "CHNOPScentric" to believe that all life must be based on the elements necessary for the lifeforms known on Earth.

Maybe life elsewhere will be more than mere "molecules".

I believe anything is possible in the vastness of our Universe and other galaxies.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OldHick
02:05 PM on 12/08/2010
We are still in the Apollo 11 mode of thinking, that something on the moon might be moving around in the shadows.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RKTesq
Commercial Litigator, San Francisco
12:22 AM on 12/08/2010
OH! When I saw the headline, "Life, But Not As We Know It" I assumed this article was about the Washington power elite and the uber-rich they keep shoveling money to. I suppose "Life" should have tipped me off.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Athena Andreadis, Ph.D.
Scientist by day, writer by night.
08:13 PM on 12/06/2010
There are actually scientific holes in this paper, Seth. Brief preview:

Arsenic and Odd Lace
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/athena-andreadis-phd/arsenic-and-odd-lace_b_791454.html
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RKTesq
Commercial Litigator, San Francisco
12:24 AM on 12/08/2010
That's the problem with you educated people. You insist upon facts and accuracy. No wonder Republicans scorn the educated.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Athena Andreadis, Ph.D.
Scientist by day, writer by night.
01:28 PM on 12/08/2010
Sadly, you are right. For a molecular biologist like me who works on nucleic acids and uses bacteria routinely, this paper was a slap in the face: it exudes contempt for rigor.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Valery Satterwhite
The Life You Lead is the Legacy You Leave
04:45 PM on 12/06/2010
We don't know what we don't know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jockmama
04:07 PM on 12/06/2010
An arsenic-based life form? It's name is Sarah Palin, isn't it? Why the big to-do? We've known about her for more than three years.
RobertJSawyer
Hugo-winning Science-Fiction Writer
02:24 PM on 12/06/2010
Seth Shostak is absolutely right that this is a significant breakthrough. The problem is the public-relations aspect. The press release could have easily said "... a major breakthrough in terrestrial biology that has implications for the existence of life elsewhere in the universe." It seems so many groups -- the American Atheists are another example currently, with their billboard campaign -- measure success in column-inches, or whatever the online equivalent is, rather than in actually getting a message out with clarity; the goal is the most media coverage possible, rather than keeping things in perspective. But congratulations to the scientists concerned on the breakthrough.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rezna
let them eat cake
06:16 PM on 12/13/2010
This isn't the Robert Sawyer friend of mine, is it? This is Colleen, hi if it's you!
02:21 PM on 12/06/2010
Faye Flam, writing in the Philadelphia Inquirer 12/6/10, pointed out that the important research yet to be done is whether the microbe has incorporated arsenic into its RNA, because that is key in reproduction. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/20101206_THE_ARSENIC-EATERS.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barry Dennis
personal decisions, personal consequences
12:58 PM on 12/06/2010
1. Life as evolved on Earth still depends on cellular structures. Might there be other examples that don't use "cells" as building blocks. Maybe molecules that are specialized? They would be non-organic "life."
2. It's a pretty long leap to assume that earth-evolved life forms, even those that use arsenic (how about cyanide, hydrogen, or any of the other elements in the periodic table, even elements that we haven't discovered on Earth), may be building blocks for life elsewhere/anywhere.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReElectNoOne
12:36 PM on 12/06/2010
"...many denizens of blog-land felt duped,..."

Us geek types are looking for the next "extraterrestrial shoe" to be dropped. To some this looked like "The" news we all know will come one day. When I saw the "pre" news I had my hopes up as well. But realistically, while it may have been over hyped, it is still very important news on the search front.

Just as finding more planets increases the number of places life might exist, finding other means by which it can form also increases the forms and places it might be found. It is important news, it is just not what we were psyched up to hear because it was not something most even considered.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bccmeteorites
Don't believe everything NASA says.
12:32 PM on 12/06/2010
I think you made a mistake Mr. Shostak. I saw the sleigh of hands and it was quick.

You say; "So from a biological perspective, the fact that these microbes could select arsenic, rather than conventional phosphorous, from the environmental menu is remarkable".

It's my understanding that these experiments were carried out in a lab in which the microbes were denied phosphorus and replaced with Arsenic by the investigators. Therefore the microbes selected nothing, it was selected for them.

It would it be safe to say if three people were denied normal food intake in a controlled environment a headline saying people indeed are cannibals may not surprise us?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rezna
let them eat cake
01:18 PM on 12/06/2010
I believe your statement isn't really for Mr. Shostak, but rather the researches who actually published this. When I asked him about this yesterday, he was very non nonchalant about the finding, and he himself admitted that it's definitely a breakthrough for science, but doesn't necessarily mean that the microbes in this circumstance were arsenic beings. Quite the contrary, they were in a circumstance where they chose to use the arsenic, which is still huge for science. We've never seen this happen before.

It really spells vindication for me because I've always disliked how science will assume something is fact, and then they find evidence that it isn't and change their minds. Let's just assume that we don't know crap, because that's true, and when we discover things to be fact then we can equate them to something in our textbooks.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bccmeteorites
Don't believe everything NASA says.
07:24 PM on 12/10/2010
Great words of wisdom, fanned.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RedDogBear
04:19 PM on 12/06/2010
The result here is not just that the organisms consumed the arsenic its that they actually changed their cell structure to use arsenic rather than phosphorous. That is a remarkable thing. To use your analogy it would be as if humans who had to eat nothing but plants started in some sense to become plants themselves.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rezna
let them eat cake
06:00 PM on 12/13/2010
Oooh, I like your analogy
lastpost
see biography
10:54 AM on 12/06/2010
"Arsenic and Old Lakes"
Animate arsenic meets dead reckoning?
If true: Doesn’t this discovery demonstrate how scientists can construct an erroneous notion of existence, using incomplete evaluations of reality?
While if untrue: Doesn’t this discovery demonstrate how scientists can construct an erroneous notion of existence, using incomplete evaluations of reality?
whitebeach
Hey, buddy, can you spare a micro-bio?
12:33 PM on 12/06/2010
Actually, no in both cases. Your attempt at paradox is clever but hollow, relying on the extreme vagueness of the phrase "erroneous notion of existence."

What science does is say: "Here is the evidence we have. Here is what we think is the best explanation of what this evidence means. New evidence at any time may cause us to modify or abandon this explanation. A better explanation may also, at any time, cause us to abandon the old one. We are building on what has gone before, and adding to it, all the time."

Science is a work in progress, always has been, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Only those who know little about it hold the belief that scientists imagine they are speaking the final word in expressing the current state of knowledge.

This system necessarily, by its very nature, means that we are working with "incomplete evaluations of reality." When you encounter a "complete evaluation of reality," please let us know.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rezna
let them eat cake
01:21 PM on 12/06/2010
Too bad the general public doesn't see it this way, or understand at all that this is how scientists look at it (which I don't think is actually true, I think a lot of scientists spend their life working on something, and then an uppity new kid on the block can ruin their entire life's work with one discovery).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Frank Smith
08:08 AM on 12/06/2010
This is obviously a big step towards the ultimate recognition that life doesn't just exist throughout the galaxy/universe but is ubiquitous. I think most of us who have given the matter much thought are not surprised but applaud the scientific effort that turned this recent discovery up.

http://ufopartisan.blogspot.com/
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VA Lady2008
07:40 AM on 12/06/2010
NASA didn't claim to find intelligent life OUT THERE somewhere. They're still looking for it here on earth
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ReElectNoOne
12:39 PM on 12/06/2010
Problem is NASA is looking in the wrong place here as well. They keep hoping to find it in Washington, which is devoid of intelligence and, wrongfully, used that as the basis by which they judge the rest of humanity.
07:16 AM on 12/06/2010
Thinking outside the box and allowing the possibilities of the unknown is how science itself as been able to advance.

Now I am no scientist, but I once sat through a 2-hour presentation at Harbor Branch Marine Institue, Ft Pierce, FL, about the new sulpher-eating complex organisms forming along hyrdo-thermal vents in the deep ocean. Not simple-celled bacterial-microbes, but complex organisms.
Prior to that discovery, most scientists would have said that was impossible, since sulphur would kill most life 'As we know it", key phrase 'as we know'.

The ability to think that because WE(earth) understand that all life requires water does not mean that all life itself requires water, back to that phrase, "As we know it". And would not even want to think we earthlings somehow, know it all.
07:45 AM on 12/06/2010
now, it was initially thought that these organisms were sulphur-based, however it has since been established that they merely consume sulphur, as food.