Looking for Life Beyond Earth
Reflections From a Warm Little Pond
|
ON THIS PAGE
|
|
The question
of how life began may not be as easy to answer as we thought.
|
|
"Early life is now believed to have passed through a stage
in which only RNA was present," ... the so-called "RNA world."
-- James Kasting
|
Back in 1953, Jim Kasting
said, scientists thought they had the origin of life figured out. Chemists
Stanley Miller and Harold Urey at the University of Chicago had simulated that
crucial instant around 3.9 billion years ago when a batch of simple inorganic
molecules, zapped by a bolt of lightning (or maybe just the Sun's warmth during
a break in the clouds), fell together to form the prototypes for the complex
organic compounds that life is made from.
Now that was a
moment. Remember it on Star Trek? The muddy puddle of ooze on the edge
of Nowheresville? The awful humidity? The onset of bubbling? Before, everything
was dead as Play-doh. After came a chain of eye-popping events that just keeps
unfolding, across the eons, into alligators and astronauts, puppies and banana
figs, mosquitos and lichens and particles of ebola virus . . .
Lightning in the lab
In their lab, Miller and
Urey shot flashes of lightning, in the form of cascades of sparks, through a
flask containing an "ocean" of liquid water and an
"atmosphere" of strongly reduced (that is, hydrogen-rich) gases --
methane, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and water vapor. After a couple of days,
they tested what was left.
"They had formed all
sorts of compounds," Kasting said, "including large quantities of
amino acids," the molecules that join to form proteins. This simple
experiment seemed to corroborate a vision Darwin (and not Gene Roddenberry) had
described a hundred years earlier, of life emerging "in some warm little
pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity,
etc., present."
Wrong atmosphere
But the Miller-Urey
experiment, important as it was, had a flaw. Urey had based his primitive-Earth
atmosphere on astronomical data just then coming in, the first spectra from the
giant planets in our solar system: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and
Neptune. These characteristic bands of color showed that the giants were
swathed in atmospheres rich in methane and ammonia, thought to be left over
from the planets' formation.
At the time, people thought
all of the planets had once shared a "primordial" atmosphere, the
result of their common birth. Because of their stronger gravity, the giants
were believed to have retained this early atmosphere, while the atmospheres of
Earth and the other, smaller planets had lost some of their lighter gases,
hydrogen among them, to space. Thus, Urey reasoned, an early Earth atmosphere,
before its hydrogen had escaped and the life-driven process of photosynthesis
had boosted its oxygen, would have been a lot like a present-day giant's.
Shortly after the
Miller-Urey experiment was published, however, geologists came up with new
findings on Earth's volcanic emissions -- and threw the old reasoning for a
loop. "What comes out of volcanoes is not methane and ammonia,"
Kasting said, "but about 80 percent water vapor, 15 to 20 percent carbon
dioxide, and traces of carbon monoxide and molecular hydrogen."
James C. G. Walker, one of
Kasting's graduate advisers at the University of Michigan during the 1970s,
took these emissions data and balanced them against the rate at which hydrogen
would be expected to escape from a planet with Earth's gravity. ("He did
all this stuff on the back of an envelope," Kasting said.) What Walker
came up with was a much different picture of Earth's early atmosphere: an
oxygen-rich mix of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and water vapor.
The catch is that oxygen,
although an absolute necessity for multicellular, advanced life, is poison to
pre-biotic synthesis. Do a Miller-Urey experiment in an oxygen-rich atmosphere,
Kasting said, and "you don't form things like amino acids. There are too
many oxygen atoms in there." So, over the years, "enthusiasm for the
warm little pond theory has waned."
New theories
Two competing theories have
emerged instead. The discovery of microbes and other small organisms living in
and around hydrothermal vents -- underwater hot springs boiling from the ocean
floor -- has led to the idea that life may have started at the bottom of the
sea. Sharp differences in temperature and oxygen concentration at the
boundaries around these vents make good catalysts for chemical reactions,
Kasting said. "The problem with this theory is that the complex organic
compounds likely to form life cannot remain stable for long at such high
temperatures." Amino acids, instead of joining up, would tend to break
down.
The other scenario has life
first coalescing in the frigid climes of outer space -- specifically, within
the cold dark hearts of interstellar dust clouds. "Long, complex organic
molecules can be made when ionizing radiation leads to ion-molecule
reactions," Kasting explained. "The intense cold prevents them from
breaking down." In this so-called "seeding from space" model,
these complex molecules are brought to Earth by incoming meteorites and comets.
The weak link here is that most of a meteor is vaporized on impact with our
atmosphere. "The survival potential for organisms is low. They get pyrolized:
Burned to a crisp."
Kasting, for his part, is
not ready to give up on the warm little pond. Using computer models of
light-triggered atmospheric processes, he is working to reconcile Darwin's
vision with the constraints imposed by a relatively oxygen-rich atmosphere.
"My idea,"
Kasting said, "is that this atmosphere did contain some methane: just
enough to allow for the formation of hydrogen-cyanide molecules, one of the key
starting materials for making both amino and nucleic acids. Ten to 100 parts
per million would be enough."
What life needs
Present-day life, he
explained, requires three types of molecules: DNA, to store the genetic
information that allows cells to replicate; RNA, which transfers that genetic
information from the nucleus to the rest of the cell; and the proteins that
catalyze these reactions. "It's a very complicated system." Yet in
1989, molecular biologists Thomas Cech of the University of Colorado and Sidney
Altman of Yale shared a Nobel prize for showing that under some circumstances
RNA can replicate on its own. Not only that, but it can store genetic
information.
RNA, in other words, can do
it all. "Early life is now believed to have passed through a stage in
which only RNA was present," Kasting said: the so-called "RNA world."
All you need for life, besides those crucial amino acids, are the ingredients
for RNA: ribose, a sugar; phosphate, a salt; and the four bases -- adenine,
cytosine, guanine, and uracil (the last replaces the thymine in DNA). The
question is, can you get these molecules in an atmosphere where significant
oxygen is present? The answer, Kasting said, is yes -- assuming there's a
little bit of methane around.
Ribose, Kasting explained, "is
simply five molecules of formaldehyde strung together," and formaldehyde
is easy to make where there is carbon dioxide and light. Phosphate occurs
routinely with the weathering of rocks. And all four bases, A, C, G, and U, can
be synthesized from hydrogen cyanide, for which you need that sprinkling of
methane.
"So the key to making
Darwin's little pond," Kasting said, "is to figure out if there was a
good source for methane in the early atmosphere."
That source, he suggests,
is under the sea, in the volcanic activity that fires up those super-hot
hydrothermal vents. Currently, the carbon released from the vents run about 99
percent carbon dioxide, he said, and about one percent methane, a slightly
different mix than what comes from volcanoes on land. "And there are good
geochemical reasons to believe that the Earth's mantle 3.9 billion years ago
was much more strongly reduced than it is today, which means the methane
component of these emissions would have been that much higher." Plenty
high enough to allow for the formation of organic molecules.
That's not to say this is
the way life sparked into being, Kasting quickly added. But it's a plausible
scenario. And if it did happen that way here, what's to stop the same process
from repeating itself, around the universe, wherever conditions happen to be
the same?
ASTROBIOLOGY
< THE LATEST NEWS > SEARCH FOR LIFE
NEXT PAGE: Can You
Relate?