MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200036420 · doi:10.1089/ast.2021.0115

Time-Sensitive Aspects of Mars Sample Return (MSR) Science

2021· article· en· W4200036420 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAstrobiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumCanadian Space Agency
FundersMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónMichigan State UniversityCollege of Engineering, Michigan State UniversityNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsMars Exploration ProgramSample (material)Process (computing)Work (physics)Scientific instrumentTube (container)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Samples returned from Mars would be placed under quarantine at a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) until they are considered safe to release to other laboratories for further study. The process of determining whether samples are safe for release, which may involve detailed analysis and/or sterilization, is expected to take several months. However, the process of breaking the sample tube seal and extracting the headspace gas will perturb local equilibrium conditions between gas and rock and set in motion irreversible processes that proceed as a function of time. Unless these time-sensitive processes are understood, planned for, and/or monitored during the quarantine period, scientific information expected from further analysis may be lost forever. At least four processes underpin the time-sensitivity of Mars returned sample science: (1) degradation of organic material of potential biological origin, (2) modification of sample headspace gas composition, (3) mineral-volatile exchange, and (4) oxidation/reduction of redox-sensitive materials. Available constraints on the timescales associated with these processes supports the conclusion that an SRF must have the capability to characterize attributes such as sample tube headspace gas composition, organic material of potential biological origin, as well as volatiles and their solid-phase hosts. Because most time-sensitive investigations are also sensitive to sterilization, these must be completed inside the SRF and on timescales of several months or less. To that end, we detail recommendations for how sample preparation and analysis could complete these investigations as efficiently as possible within an SRF. Finally, because constraints on characteristic timescales that define time-sensitivity for some processes are uncertain, future work should focus on: (1) quantifying the timescales of volatile exchange for core material physically and mineralogically similar to samples expected to be returned from Mars, and (2) identifying and developing stabilization or temporary storage strategies that mitigate volatile exchange until analysis can be completed. Executive Summary Any samples returned from Mars would be placed under quarantine at a Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) until it can be determined that they are safe to release to other laboratories for further study. The process of determining whether samples are safe for release, which may involve detailed analysis and/or sterilization, is expected to take several months. However, the process of breaking the sample tube seal and extracting the headspace gas would perturb local equilibrium conditions between gas and rock and set in motion irreversible processes that proceed as a function of time. Unless these processes are understood, planned for, and/or monitored during the quarantine period, scientific information expected from further analysis may be lost forever . Specialist members of the Mars Sample Return Planning Group Phase 2 (MSPG-2), referred to here as the Time-Sensitive Focus Group, have identified four processes that underpin the time-sensitivity of Mars returned sample science: (1) degradation of organic material of potential biological origin, (2) modification of sample headspace gas composition, (3) mineral-volatile exchange, and (4) oxidation/reduction of redox-sensitive materials ( Figure 2 ). Consideration of the timescales and the degree to which these processes jeopardize scientific investigations of returned samples supports the conclusion that an SRF must have the capability to characterize: (1) sample tube headspace gas composition, (2) organic material of potential biological origin, (3) volatiles bound to or within minerals, and (4) minerals or other solids that host volatiles ( Table 4 ). Most of the investigations classified as time-sensitive in this report are also sensitive to sterilization by either heat treatment and/or gamma irradiation (Velbel et al., 2022 ). Therefore, these investigations must be completed inside biocontainment and on timescales that minimize the irrecoverable loss of scientific information (i.e., several months or less; Section 5) . To that end, the Time-Sensitive Focus Group has outlined a number of specific recommendations for sample preparation and instrumentation in order to complete these investigations as efficiently as possible within an SRF ( Table 5 ). Constraints on the characteristic timescales that define time-sensitivity for different processes can range from relatively coarse to uncertain (Section 4). Thus, future work should focus on: (1) quantifying the timescales of volatile exchange for variably lithified core material physically and mineralogically similar to samples expected to be returned from Mars, and (2) identifying and developing stabilization strategies or temporary storage strategies that mitigate volatile exchange until analysis can be completed. List of Findings FINDING T-1: Aqueous phases, and oxidants liberated by exposure of the sample to aqueous phases, mediate and accelerate the degradation of critically important but sensitive organic compounds such as DNA. FINDING T-2: Warming samples increases reaction rates and destroys compounds making biological studies much more time-sensitive. MAJOR FINDING T-3: Given the potential for rapid degradation of biomolecules, (especially in the presence of aqueous phases and/or reactive O-containing compounds) Sample Safety Assessment Protocol (SSAP) and parallel biological analysis are time sensitive and must be carried out as soon as possible. FINDING T-4: If molecules or whole cells from either extant or extinct organisms have persisted under present-day martian conditions in the samples, then it follows that preserving sample aliquots under those same conditions ( i.e., 6 mbar total pressure in a dominantly CO 2 atmosphere and at an average temperature of -80 ° C) in a small isolation chamber is likely to allow for their continued persistence. FINDING T-5: Volatile compounds ( e.g., HCN and formaldehyde) have been lost from Solar System materials stored under standard curation conditions. FINDING T-6: Reactive O-containing species have been identified in situ at the martian surface and so may be present in rock or regolith samples returned from Mars. These species rapidly degrade organic molecules and react more rapidly as temperature and humidity increase. FINDING T-7: Because the sample tubes would not be closed with perfect seals and because, after arrival on Earth, there will be a large pressure gradient across that seal such that the probability of contamination of the tube interiors by terrestrial gases increases with time, the as-received sample tubes are considered a poor choice for long-term gas sample storage. This is an important element of time sensitivity. MAJOR FINDING T-8: To determine how volatiles may have been exchanged with headspace gas during transit to Earth, the composition of martian atmosphere (in a separately sealed reservoir and/or extracted from the witness tubes), sample headspace gas composition, temperature/time history of the samples, and mineral composition (including mineral-bound volatiles) must all be quantified. When the sample tube seal is breached, mineral-bound volatile loss to the curation atmosphere jeopardizes robust determination of volatile exchange history between mineral and headspace.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAstrobiologySame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207