No abstract

The search for signs of life on Mars and beyond is time consuming and labor-intensive; hence, it is critical to understand how to design sampling strategies that can maximize the likelihood of success. Two distinct Mars analogue environments in Iceland were selected to represent volcanic resurfacing and glacial environments where characterization of different biosignatures at various spatial scales (100 m, 10 m, 1 m, 10 cm) was performed. This study serves the twofold purposes of (1) understanding the different levels of biosignature distributions in these analogue environments and (2) the spatial distributions of biosignatures in these environments, with an overarching goal of drawing lessons from low biomass Mars analogue environments to inform the best sampling strategies for sample collection strategies on Mars. Our results show that samples should be collected for analysis at large (at least 100 m spacing) to capture most differences within an apparently homogeneous environment of the aged resurfaced volcanic region like Mælifellssandur, whereas a smaller spacing at 10 m scale is necessary for younger glacial–volcanic environments like Fimmvörduháls. This study also illustrates the importance of understanding the variability across spatial scales in sampling design for future planetary missions.

No abstract

NASA makes many thousands of zero-sum decisions every year regarding funding and mission planning. A primary stated goal for the outcomes of these decisions is that scientific merit be recognized and rewarded. How does one evaluate merit in a time of unprecedented publication volume? In the lack of reproducible consensus for metrics of scientific value it is human nature to fall back on heuristics that amplify bias. This same difficulty in assimilating information deforms all researchers' ability to sharpen experimental narratives through collaborative review and engagement. This whitepaper uses summary results from the 981 most-cited articles from the journal Astrobiology and 807 of their authors' complete publication histories to illustrate the accelerating problem of forging consensus in the information age, and argues that current metrics-based structures are guaranteed to result in biased outcomes. Three solutions are proposed that NASA should consider to mitigate bias, speed democratization in science, and better inform exploration in the lab and beyond.

No abstract