Experiments show the record of early life could be full of “false
positives”
Boulder, Colo., USA: For most of Earth’s history, life was limited to the
microscopic realm, with bacteria occupying nearly every possible niche.
Life is generally thought to have evolved in some of the most extreme
environments, like hydrothermal vents deep in the ocean or hot springs that
still simmer in Yellowstone. Much of what we know about the evolution of
life comes from the rock record, which preserves rare fossils of bacteria
from billions of years ago. But that record is steeped in controversy, with
each new discovery (rightfully) critiqued, questioned, and analyzed from
every angle. Even then, uncertainty in whether a purported fossil is a
trace of life can persist, and the field is plagued by “false positives” of
early life. To understand evolution on our planet—and to help find signs of
life on others—scientists have to be able to tell the difference.
New experiments by geobiologists Julie Cosmidis, Christine Nims, and their
colleagues, published today in Geology, could help settle
arguments over which microfossils are signs of early life and which are
not. They have shown that fossilized spheres and filaments—two common
bacterial shapes—made of organic carbon (typically associated with life)
can form abiotically (in the absence of living organisms) and might even be
easier to preserve than bacteria.
“One big problem is that the fossils are a very simple morphology, and
there are lots of non-biological processes that can reproduce them,”
Cosmidis says. “If you find a full skeleton of a dinosaur, it's a very
complex structure that's impossible for a chemical process to reproduce.”
It’s much harder to have that certainty with fossilized microbes.
Their work was spurred by an accidental discovery a few years back, with
which both Cosmidis and Nims were involved while working in Alexis
Templeton’s lab. While mixing organic carbon and sulfide, they noticed that
spheres and filaments were forming and assumed they were the result of
bacterial activity. But on closer inspection, Cosmidis quickly realized
they were formed abiotically. “Very early, we noticed that these things
looked a lot like bacteria, both chemically and morphologically,” she says.
“They start just looking like a residue at the bottom of the experimental
vessel,” researcher Christine Nims says, “but under the microscope, you
could see these beautiful structures that looked microbial. And they formed
in these very sterile conditions, so these stunning features essentially
came out of nothing. It was really exciting work.”
“We thought, ‘What if they could form in a natural environment? What if
they could be preserved in rocks?’” Cosmidis says. “We had to try that, to
see if they can be fossilized.”
Nims set about running the new experiments, testing to see if these abiotic
structures, which they called biomorphs, could be fossilized, like
a bacterium would be. By adding biomorphs to a silica solution, they aimed
to recreate the formation of chert, a silica-rich rock that commonly
preserves early microfossils. For weeks, she would carefully track the
small-scale ‘fossilization’ progress under a microscope. They found not
only that they could be fossilized, but also that these abiotic shapes were
much easier to preserve than bacterial remains. The abiotic ‘fossils,’
structures composed of organic carbon and sulfur, were more resilient and
less likely to flatten out than their fragile biological counterparts.
“Microbes don’t have bones,” Cosmidis explains. “They don’t have skins or
skeletons. They’re just squishy organic matter. So to preserve them, you
have to have very specific conditions”—like low rates of photosynthesis and
rapid sediment deposition—“so it’s kind of rare when that happens.”
On one level, their discovery complicates things: knowing that these shapes
can be formed without life and preserved more easily than bacteria casts
doubt, generally, on our record of early life. But for a while,
geobiologists have known better than to rely solely on morphology to
analyze potential microfossils. They bring in chemistry, too.
The “organic envelopes” Nims created in the lab were formed in a
high-sulfur environment, replicating conditions on early Earth (and hot
springs today). Pyrite, or “fool’s gold,” is an iron-sulfide mineral that
would likely have formed in such conditions, so its presence could be used
as a beacon for potentially problematic microfossils. “If you look at
ancient rocks that contain what we think are microfossils, they very often
also contain pyrite,” Cosmidis says. “For me, that should be a red flag:
‘Let’s be more careful here.’ It’s not like we are doomed to never be able
to tell what the real microfossils are. We just have to get better at it.”
FEATURED ARTICLE
Organic biomorphs may be better preserved than microorganisms in
early Earth sediments
Christine Nims; Julia Lafond; Julien Alleon; Alexis S. Templeton; Julie
Cosmidis
Author contact: Julie Cosmidis, julie.cosmidis@earth.ox.ac.uk
Paper URL:
https://pubs.geoscienceworld.org/gsa/geology/article/doi/10.1130/G48152.1/594307/Organic-biomorphs-may-be-better-preserved-than
GEOLOGY articles are online at
http://geology.geoscienceworld.org/content/early/recent
. Representatives of the media may obtain complimentary articles by
contacting Kea Giles at the e-mail address above. Please discuss articles
of interest with the authors before publishing stories on their work, and
please make reference to GEOLOGY in articles published. Non-media requests
for articles may be directed to GSA Sales and Service,
gsaservice@geosociety.org.
https://www.geosociety.org
# # #