Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30034979›Full record

ReviewJournal of geophysical research. Planets2018

A Field Guide to Finding Fossils on Mars.

S McMahon, T Bosak, J P Grotzinger, R E Milliken, R E Summons, M Daye, S A Newman, A Fraeman, K H Williford, D E G Briggs

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of geophysical research. Planets, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Multi-technique characterization of iron reduction by an AntarcticApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Astrobiology · 2022
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. A Field Guide to Finding Fossils on Mars.Journal of geophysical research. Planets · 2018
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

S McMahonDepartment of Geology and Geophysics Yale University New Haven CT USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8589-2041
T BosakDepartment of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge MA USA.
J P GrotzingerDivision of Geological and Planetary Sciences California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA USA.
R E MillikenDepartment of Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences Brown University Providence RI USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3240-4918
R E SummonsDepartment of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge MA USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7144-8537
M DayeDepartment of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge MA USA.
S A NewmanDepartment of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge MA USA.
A FraemanJet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4017-5158
K H WillifordJet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0633-408X
D E G BriggsDepartment of Geology and Geophysics Yale University New Haven CT USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Martian surface is cold, dry, exposed to biologically harmful radiation and apparently barren today. Nevertheless, there is clear geological evidence for warmer, wetter intervals in the past that could have supported life at or near the surface. This evidence has motivated National Aeronautics and Space Administration and European Space Agency to prioritize the search for any remains or traces of organisms from early Mars in forthcoming missions. Informed by (1) stratigraphic, mineralogical and geochemical data collected by previous and current missions, (2) Earth's fossil record, and (3) experimental studies of organic decay and preservation, we here consider whether, how, and where fossils and isotopic biosignatures could have been preserved in the depositional environments and mineralizing media thought to have been present in habitable settings on early Mars. We conclude that Noachian-Hesperian Fe-bearing clay-rich fluvio-lacustrine siliciclastic deposits, especially where enriched in silica, currently represent the most promising and best understood astropaleontological targets. Siliceous sinters would also be an excellent target, but their presence on Mars awaits confirmation. More work is needed to improve our understanding of fossil preservation in the context of other environments specific to Mars, particularly within evaporative salts and pore/fracture-filling subsurface minerals.

Indexed as

astrobiologyfossilsMars

Identifiers

PMID30034979
PMCPMC6049883

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.