ArticleAstrobiology2017
Four Fallacies and an Oversight: Searching for Martian Life.
Article in Astrobiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addition of anaerobic electron acceptors to solid media did not enhance growth of 125 spacecraft bacteria under simulated low-pressure Martian conditions.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Inevitable future: space colonization beyond Earth with microbes first.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2019Article
- Is Searching for Martian Life a Priority for the Mars Community?Astrobiology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While it is anticipated that future human missions to Mars will increase the amount of biological and organic contamination that might be distributed on that planet, robotic missions continue to grow in capability and complexity, requiring precautions to be taken now to protect Mars, and particularly areas of Mars that might be Special Regions. Such precautionary cleanliness requirements for spacecraft have evolved over the course of the space age, as we have learned more about planetary environments, and are the subject of regular deliberations and decisions sponsored by the Committee on Space Research (COSPAR). COSPAR's planetary protection policy is maintained as an international consensus standard for spacecraft cleanliness that is recognized by the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. In response to the paper presented in this issue by Fairén et al. (2017), we examine both their concept of evidence for possible life on Mars and their logic in recommending that spacecraft cleanliness requirements be relaxed to access Special Regions "before it is too late." We find that there are shortcomings in their plans to look for evidence of life on Mars, that they do not support their contention that appropriate levels of spacecraft cleanliness are unaffordable, that there are major risks in assuming martian life could be identified by nucleic acid sequence comparison (especially if those sequences are obtained from a Special Region contaminated with Earth life), and that the authors do not justify their contention that exploration with dirty robots, now, is preferable to the possibility that later contamination will be spread by human exploration. We also note that the potential effects of contaminating resources and environments essential to future human occupants of Mars are both significant and not addressed by Fairén et al. (2017). Key Words: Mars-Special Region-Mission-Life detection-Planetary protection. Astrobiology 17, 971-974.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.