[HN Gopher] Researchers Find Microbe Capable of Producing Oxygen...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Researchers Find Microbe Capable of Producing Oxygen from Martian
       Soil
        
       Author : ashishgupta2209
       Score  : 92 points
       Date   : 2025-12-03 06:34 UTC (16 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (scienceclock.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (scienceclock.com)
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | Source: https://www.universetoday.com/articles/one-extremophile-
       | eats...
        
       | canadiantim wrote:
       | Lame title. Life wasn't found on mars they just cultured a
       | microbe on soil from mars.
        
         | stevenjgarner wrote:
         | IMHO I feel the title is appropriate. They are not claiming to
         | have found life on Mars, they are making the very pivotal claim
         | that there are forms of life that can turn liabilities on Mars
         | into assets.
        
           | stavros wrote:
           | Agreed, the clear was very clear for me too. I wonder what
           | the microbe eats, and if we can supply that in enough volumes
           | to make a dent to Mars' atmosphere.
        
           | nephihaha wrote:
           | True, it is deliberately misleading. However, some possible
           | indicators of life have been found on Mars although these are
           | contested. Two thar I can think of are methane emissions on
           | the planets, and the soil tests by the Viking landers in the
           | seventies, which returned ambiguous results.
        
             | bilekas wrote:
             | > True, it is deliberately misleading.
             | 
             | It's not misleading, this article has nothing to do with
             | finding life on Mars.
             | 
             | > If humans ever build bases on Mars, they will need
             | systems that can provide oxygen without constant resupply
             | from Earth
             | 
             | Have you READ the article ? Or just misinterpreted the
             | title and then commented ?
        
               | canadiantim wrote:
               | It is misleading. The title suggests they found a microbe
               | on mars: "Researchers Find Microbe... from Martian Soil".
               | They did not.
        
               | nephihaha wrote:
               | I read it first. That second comment about bases is not
               | mine.
        
         | bilekas wrote:
         | The title nor the article ever said that life _was_ found on
         | Mars ?
        
         | Gravityloss wrote:
         | scientist discover microbe [...] from martian soil
         | 
         | [...] microbe produces oxygen from martian soil
         | 
         | I guess you read it the former way while most people read it
         | the latter way. Neither is wrong or right. Slightly garden-
         | pathy title.
        
       | stevenjgarner wrote:
       | This is so inspiring. It has become almost axiomatic that Martian
       | regolith is toxic. [1] This microbe research represents a move in
       | thinking from planetary protection (protecting us from Mars) to
       | In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU), using Mars to support us.
       | The microbe turns two liabilities -- the high perchlorate ClO4
       | mineral content and the atmospheric CO2 -- into the two
       | necessities for a colony: building material and breathable air.
       | 
       | [1] References:
       | 
       | Davila, A. F., Willson, D., Coates, J. D., & McKay, C. P. (2013).
       | Perchlorate on Mars: a chemical hazard and a resource for humans.
       | International Journal of Astrobiology, 12(4), 321-325.
       | https://doi.org/10.1017/s1473550413000189
       | 
       | Oze, C., Beisel, J., Dabsys, E., Dall, J., North, G., Scott, A.,
       | Lopez, A. M., Holmes, R., & Fendorf, S. (2021). Perchlorate and
       | Agriculture on Mars. Soil Systems, 5(3), 37.
       | https://doi.org/10.3390/soilsystems5030037
       | 
       | Perchlorate on Mars - Overview and Implications. (2019). (NASA
       | Technical Report).
       | 
       | Perchlorate-Reducing Biofilms Open a New Avenue for Martian
       | Agriculture. (n.d.). Current Trends in Biotechnology and
       | Bioengineering Sciences, 1(1).
       | 
       | Potential Health Impacts, Treatments, and Countermeasures of
       | Martian Dust on Future Human Space Exploration. (n.d.). Life.
        
         | HPsquared wrote:
         | That reminds of how oxygen itself was highly toxic to the early
         | anaerobic lifeforms on Earth.
        
       | adrian_b wrote:
       | As always, the title is grossly incorrect.
       | 
       | The "microbe", is a blue-green alga, Chroococcidiopsis.
       | 
       | It does not produce oxygen from Martian soil, but from water, if
       | you give water and solar light to it.
       | 
       | The newsworthy part is that this cyanobacterium can survive in
       | the presence of the toxic Martian soil and it can also survive
       | the freezing caused by the Martian temperatures.
       | 
       | Therefore it could be used in some kind of greenhouses built on
       | Mars, but a water source for supplying the greenhouse must be
       | found.
       | 
       | In general, on Mars producing enough water to cover all needs
       | will be the greatest technical challenge. All other substances
       | are abundant enough in comparison with the required quantities,
       | except possibly the noble gases, like argon and helium (but in
       | the non-oxidizing Martian atmosphere there will be much less need
       | of inert gases for techniques like welding).
        
         | bilekas wrote:
         | I am quite ignorant on these specifics but wouldn't it be
         | feasable to basically have them in a greenhouse environment,
         | heated, in the North pole area, where I believe there was some
         | form of IceWater found..
         | 
         | If possible to even melt some of that, and let that cascade the
         | effect ?
         | 
         | https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Mars_E...
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | That would work only for a base located at the North pole.
           | 
           | If you want to explore other regions, or to set there a base,
           | for instance for extracting some useful minerals, all the
           | water will have to be transported from the poles, unless some
           | quantities of ice will be discovered underground elsewhere
           | (or of hydrated rocks, which can produce water when heated
           | enough).
           | 
           | Unless enough ice or hydrated rocks are discovered
           | underground elsewhere, the amount of ice from the poles will
           | sustain only a small human population.
        
         | stevenjgarner wrote:
         | How is it "grossly incorrect"? Using both taxonomic and size
         | classification, is it not accurate to refer to a blue-green
         | alga as a "microbe" or "microorganism." [1]
         | 
         | A microbe (or microorganism) is generally defined as an
         | organism that is microscopic--too small to be seen clearly by
         | the naked eye. Blue-green algae fit this definition as they are
         | single-celled or form microscopic colonies.
         | 
         | The scientific name for blue-green algae is cyanobacteria,
         | which are technically a type of bacteria, universally
         | classified as microbes. [2] They are prokaryotes (lacking a
         | nucleus and other membrane-bound organelles), and the two
         | prokaryotic domains of life (Bacteria and Archaea) are composed
         | entirely of microbes.
         | 
         | [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9025173/
         | 
         | [2] https://doh.wa.gov/community-and-
         | environment/contaminants/bl...
        
           | gus_massa wrote:
           | > _How is it "grossly incorrect"?_
           | 
           | Perhaps it's not glossly incorrect, but I classyfy it as
           | "super ultra mega misleading".
           | 
           | I'd like a title like "*Cyanobacteria survives in water
           | contamined with martian soil"
        
             | embedding-shape wrote:
             | HN title at the moment is: Researchers Find Microbe Capable
             | of Producing Oxygen from Martian Soil
             | 
             | Article title at the moment is: Microbe That Could Turn
             | Martian Dust into Oxygen
             | 
             | Neither of those are particularly misleading, but requires
             | you to read it carefully I suppose, otherwise it can
             | misleading I suppose. I guess "Martian Dust" is the most
             | misleading part of the quote, as the soil isn't actually
             | Martian of origin, but actually "materials that are similar
             | to Martian soil".
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | Both titles are very misleading, because neither "oxygen
               | is produced from Martian soil" nor "Martian dust is
               | turned into oxygen".
               | 
               | As I have said, the oxygen comes only from water, which
               | is missing on Mars, unlike the abundant Martian soil or
               | Martian dust.
               | 
               | So the "microbe" does not solve the problem of oxygen
               | production, which is obtaining water. With water, making
               | oxygen by electrolysis is trivial and a problem solved
               | long ago.
               | 
               | The cyanobacterium can make various useful organic
               | substances, like proteins and vitamins. The fact that it
               | also makes some oxygen is a minor additional advantage.
               | 
               | Even if such cyanobacteria will be grown on Mars, most of
               | the oxygen will be made by electrolysis anyway, because
               | the efficiency from solar light to free oxygen is much
               | better and the photovoltaic cells continue to function in
               | a much wider range of temperatures.
        
               | embedding-shape wrote:
               | > As I have said, the oxygen comes only from water, which
               | is missing on Mars
               | 
               | The title nor the article itself doesn't claim otherwise,
               | unless I'm missing something?
               | 
               | It's also not claiming that the microbe somehow solve the
               | problem of obtaining water, or anything else.
               | 
               | The only thing they claim is that this specific microbe,
               | under the right circumstances, can produce oxygen while
               | it grows in Martian-like soil. That's what the article
               | claims, and the titles.
        
               | dale_glass wrote:
               | "Producing Oxygen from Martian Soil" to me implies that
               | martian soil is the thing being turned into oxygen.
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | You have reproduced yourself the 2 titles, which contain:
               | 
               | "Microbe Capable of Producing Oxygen from Martian Soil"
               | 
               | "Microbe That Could Turn Martian Dust into Oxygen"
               | 
               | The words "producing X from Y" and "turn Y into X" are
               | extremely clear and they do not admit alternative
               | interpretations. They both claim that X=oxygen comes from
               | Y=soil|dust, contrary to what you say, that the titles do
               | not contain such claims.
               | 
               | I normally avoid to follow the fashion of accusing
               | posters of being AI bots, but such a failure of
               | comprehension could be explained only for an AI bot, or
               | perhaps for someone who understands very little English,
               | but the latter explanation does not match the correct
               | English of the message.
               | 
               | Perhaps you have used an English translation service that
               | has confused you?
        
           | adrian_b wrote:
           | It is grossly incorrect because it does not "produce oxygen
           | from Martian soil".
           | 
           | This is extremely misleading, because on Mars Martian soil is
           | abundant, while water is very scarce, so the title makes the
           | reader believe that this cyanobacterium solves easily the
           | production of oxygen.
           | 
           | It does not help at all for oxygen production. If you have
           | water, then it is easy to produce hydrogen by electrolysis,
           | using solar energy. Getting water on Mars is the hard
           | problem.
           | 
           | There are chances that such cyanobacteria will be used on
           | Mars, but for producing protein and other useful organic
           | substances, with oxygen only as a byproduct.
           | 
           | However I believe that at least for the more distant future
           | there is a better alternative to the use of cyanobacteria:
           | the capture of solar energy by artificial means, coupled with
           | the synthesis of some simple organic substance, e.g. glycerol
           | or glycine, which can then be used to feed a culture of fungi
           | located underground, which can then produce proteins and all
           | the other complex substances needed for human food. There
           | already are genetically modified fungi that can produce whey
           | protein or chicken egg white protein suitable for human
           | consumption.
           | 
           | This variant is better because photovoltaic cells have better
           | efficiency for capturing solar energy and without
           | environmental constraints, while genetically modified fungi
           | can produce proteins of better quality than cyanobacteria and
           | also any other complex organic substances that will be
           | needed.
        
             | KalMann wrote:
             | I think the problem with your post is that it started a
             | list of "incorrect statements" with a statement that wasn't
             | incorrect.
        
               | adrian_b wrote:
               | Maybe I have not been clear enough, but there was no list
               | of incorrect statements, as I was criticizing only a
               | title.
               | 
               | I did not say that was anything incorrect in calling a
               | blue-green alga as "microbe". I have only mentioned what
               | kind of "microbe" they had in mind in order to explain
               | why the title is incorrect in claiming that the "microbe"
               | makes oxygen from Martian soil, because blue-green algae,
               | like plants and like any other living beings from Earth
               | that can produce oxygen, produce the oxygen by splitting
               | it from water and by using energy captured from solar
               | light.
               | 
               | There are no known living beings that can produce oxygen
               | from anything else than water, so if such a "microbe" had
               | been discovered, that would have been a much more
               | important discovery than the possible use of
               | cyanobacteria on Mars.
               | 
               | Unlike the capabilities of catalyzing other chemical
               | reactions, which frequently have appeared multiple times
               | in the history of life, the ability to produce free
               | oxygen has appeared only once and then it has been
               | inherited from that source by all living beings that can
               | do this, even if this heritage has been often transferred
               | between very unrelated living beings. Therefore there
               | exists a unique mechanism for this reaction, based on the
               | oxidation of manganese with the help of solar light,
               | which then oxidizes the oxygen from water into free
               | dioxygen.
               | 
               | The Martian soil is full of oxygen, but most of that
               | oxygen is tightly bound on metallic cations, so it would
               | require a very high amount of energy to be dissociated
               | from them.
               | 
               | Nevertheless, it should be possible to develop an
               | electrolytic process for producing oxygen from the
               | perchlorates that are abundant in Martian soil, saving
               | the precious water for other purposes, i.e. for those
               | that need the hydrogen from water, e.g. for making fuel
               | and food.
        
         | pfdietz wrote:
         | Yeah, I was expecting something about a microorganism that
         | could (say) decompose perchlorate to release oxygen, not some
         | more mundane photosynthesizer.
        
       | vinni2 wrote:
       | "Researchers tested this by using soil that mimics Martian
       | regolith. "
       | 
       | Would this hold for real Martian regolith?
        
         | fnands wrote:
         | Once the Mars Sample Return brings some back we can test
         | that...
        
       | philipwhiuk wrote:
       | We've had artifical oxygen generation for a while: [0] . It's
       | probably useful to have a biological method.
       | 
       | The survivability in the soil bit is actually the more important
       | piece.
       | 
       | [0]
       | https://www.nasa.gov/missions/mars-2020-perseverance/perseve...
        
       | kragen wrote:
       | I thought Martian soil was full of perchlorate, which produces
       | oxygen if you just get it wet and expose it to somewhere the gas
       | can escape?
       | 
       | I guess we'll never know, because this article is just blogspam
       | linking another blogspam article that doesn't link the actual
       | preprint, just says, "A recent paper from Daniella Billi of the
       | University of Rome Tor Vergata , [sic] published in pre-print
       | form in Acta Astronautica, reviews how one particular
       | extremophile fills the role of both useful test subject and
       | useful tool all at once."
        
       | georgeecollins wrote:
       | No one writes about technology to colonize Antarctica. Its
       | warmer, has more ready water, less radiation and a breathable
       | atmosphere. Plus its much easier to transport supplies.
        
         | glitchc wrote:
         | Going to Mars gives us biodome diversity. What's the gain in
         | making Antarctica habitable? It's not like we're running out of
         | land, and there are many underutilized parcels of land
         | elsewhere on the planet that would be easier to terraform than
         | Antarctica.
        
           | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
           | We're terraforming Antarctica to make it (potentially)
           | habitable anyway.
           | 
           | Whether we like it or not.
        
           | nephihaha wrote:
           | I think they need to terraform the world's megacities first.
           | :)
        
         | scandox wrote:
         | Yes and 19th century gentleman scientists were a lot more
         | interested in studying savage tribes than their valets.
         | Imagination is a great motivator and it is more stimulated by
         | what is far away than what is near.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-03 23:01 UTC)