Science

Separating out signals recorded at the seafloor

Roger Bryant and David Fike’s research reveals that pyrite sulfur isotopes mainly reflect local conditions, shifting fundamental understanding of oceanic environmental studies.

Published

3 months ago

November 1, 2024

Daily News Staff

Newswise — Blame it on plate tectonics. The deep ocean is never preserved, but instead is lost to time as the seafloor is subducted. Geologists are mostly left with shallower rocks from closer to the shoreline to inform their studies of Earth history.

Signals from the Sea

“We have only a good record of the deep ocean for the last ~180 million years,” said David Fike, the Glassberg/Greensfelder Distinguished University Professor of Earth, Environmental, and Planetary Sciences in Arts & Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis. “Everything else is just shallow-water deposits. So it’s really important to understand the bias that might be present when we look at shallow-water deposits.”

One of the ways that scientists like Fike use deposits from the seafloor is to reconstruct timelines of past ecological and environmental change. Researchers are keenly interested in how and when oxygen began to build up in the oceans and atmosphere, making Earth more hospitable to life as we know it.

For decades they have relied on pyrite, the iron-sulfide mineral known as “fool’s gold,” as a sensitive recorder of conditions in the marine environment where it is formed. By measuring the bulk isotopic composition of sulfur in pyrite samples — the relative abundance of sulfur atoms with slightly different mass — scientists have tried to better understand ancient microbial activity and interpret global chemical cycles.

But the outlook for pyrite is not so shiny anymore. In a pair of companion papers published Nov. 24 in the journal Science, Fike and his collaborators show that variations in pyrite sulfur isotopes may not represent the global processes that have made them such popular targets of analysis.

Instead, Fike’s research demonstrates that pyritte responds predominantly to local processes that should not be taken as representative of the whole ocean. A new microanalysis approach developed at Washington University helped the researchers to separate out signals in pyrite that reveal the relative influence of microbes and that of local climate.

For the first study, Fike worked with Roger Bryant, who completed his graduate studies at Washington University, to examine the grain-level distribution of pyrite sulfur isotope compositions in a sample of recent glacial-interglacial sediments. They developed and used a cutting-edge analytical technique with the secondary-ion mass spectrometer (SIMS) in Fike’s laboratory.

“We analyzed every individual pyrite crystal that we could find and got isotopic values for each one,” Fike said. By considering the distribution of results from individual grains, rather than the average (or bulk) results, the scientists showed that it is possible to tease apart the role of the physical properties of the depositional environment, like the sedimentation rate and the porosity of the sediments, from the microbial activity in the seabed.

“We found that even when bulk pyrite sulfur isotopes changed a lot between glacials and interglacials, the minima of our single grain pyrite distributions remained broadly constant,” Bryant said. “This told us that microbial activity did not drive the changes in bulk pyrite sulfur isotopes and refuted one of our major hypotheses.”

“Using this framework, we’re able to go in and look at the separate roles of microbes and sediments in driving the signals,” Fike said. “That to me represents a huge step forward in being able to interpret what is recorded in these signals.”

In the second paper, led by Itay Halevy of the Weizmann Institute of Science and co-authored by Fike and Bryant, the scientists developed and explored a computer model of marine sediments, complete with mathematical representations of the microorganisms that degrade organic matter and turn sulfate into sulfide and the processes that trap that sulfide in pyrite.

“We found that variations in the isotopic composition of pyrite are mostly a function of the depositional environment in which the pyrite formed,” Halevy said. The new model shows that a range of parameters of the sedimentary environment affect the balance between sulfate and sulfide consumption and resupply, and that this balance is the major determinant of the sulfur isotope composition of pyrite.

“The rate of sediment deposition on the seafloor, the proportion of organic matter in that sediment, the proportion of reactive iron particles, the density of packing of the sediment as it settles to the seafloor — all of these properties affect the isotopic composition of pyrite in ways that we can now understand,” he said.

Importantly, none of these properties of the sedimentary environment are strongly linked to the global sulfur cycle, to the oxidation state of the global ocean, or essentially any other property that researchers have traditionally used pyrite sulfur isotopes to reconstruct, the scientists said.

“The really exciting aspect of this new work is that it gives us a predictive model for how we think other pyrite records should behave,” Fike said. “For example, if we can interpret other records — and better understand that they are driven by things like local changes in sedimentation, rather than global parameters about ocean oxygen state or microbial activity — then we can try to use this data to refine our understanding of sea level change in the past.”

Source: Washington University in St. Louis

The science section of our news blog STM Daily News provides readers with captivating and up-to-date information on the latest scientific discoveries, breakthroughs, and innovations across various fields. We offer engaging and accessible content, ensuring that readers with different levels of scientific knowledge can stay informed. Whether it’s exploring advancements in medicine, astronomy, technology, or environmental sciences, our science section strives to shed light on the intriguing world of scientific exploration and its profound impact on our daily lives. From thought-provoking articles to informative interviews with experts in the field, STM Daily News Science offers a harmonious blend of factual reporting, analysis, and exploration, making it a go-to source for science enthusiasts and curious minds alike. https://stmdailynews.com/category/science/

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Related Topics:Environmental Science Geology seafloor signals

Up Next

La Niña Weather Pattern to Disrupt Arizona Winter: What to Expect for 2024-2025

Don't Miss

NASA Set for SpaceX Crew-9 Dragon Station Relocation

Daily News Staff

News

Understanding paranormal beliefs and conspiracy theories isn’t just about misinformation – this course unpacks the history

Published

7 hours ago

January 30, 2025

The Conversation

paranormal — The ‘black mailbox’ along Highway 375 near Rachel, Nev., a traditional spot for UFO hunters to meet and search the skies near Area 51. AP Photo/John Locher

Jeb Card, Miami University

Uncommon Courses is an occasional series from The Conversation U.S. highlighting unconventional approaches to teaching.

Title of course:

“Investigating the Paranormal”

What prompted the idea for the course?

My training and professional work have been in Mesoamerican archaeology, but I’ve had a lifelong fascination with paranormal concepts. In fact, I considered studying the UFO community for my doctoral research in cultural anthropology.

I eventually fused these two interests in my book “Spooky Archaeology: Myth and the Science of the Past,” which examines why archaeology shows up so much in ideas about the mysterious and weird. Most people are familiar with pop culture characters like Indiana Jones seeking magical artifacts. Perhaps less immediately obvious is just how common archaeological topics are in paranormal and conspiracy culture.

The popularity of paranormal ideas – from television shows and thousands of podcasts to UFOs on the front page of The New York Times and in government investigations – made it clear that a course on paranormal culture would be an excellent way for students to get a taste of social science research.

What does the course explore?

The material begins with premodern ideas of magic, myth and metaphysics. The narrative that “Western” societies tell of the development of the modern world is that the Enlightenment cast off supernatural thinking in favor of science. The historical reality, however, is not so simple.

As science based on observation of material evidence emerged in the 17th through 19th centuries, so did a paranormal worldview: theories about a nonmaterial or hidden reality beyond the mundane, from monsters to psychic powers. Some of these ideas were tied to older religious notions of the sacred or strange but not divine phenomena. Others were new – particularly those suggesting the hidden existence of prehistoric extinct creatures or lost cities.

In either case, the key element was that proponents of these ideas often tried to support their existence with the kind of evidence used in science, though their “proofs” fell short of scientific standards. In other words, the paranormal is in conflict with the knowledge and worldview of modernity but also attempts to use the concepts of modernity to oppose it.

The class examines how this tension produced 20th century “-ologies” like parapsychology, which examines evidence for consciousness beyond matter, and cryptozoology, which searches the ends of the Earth for creatures tied to the mythic past. We also learn about UFOlogy, whose proponents have collected alleged contacts with technology and beings from beyond this world ever since the Cold War, as great earthly powers filled the skies with secretive hi-tech aircraft and spaceships.

As the class concludes, we examine how the “-ologies” declined after the Cold War, alongside the cultural capital of science, whose height of public respect was in the mid-20th century. Since then, proving the existence of paranormal things to institutional scientists has become less important in paranormal communities than promoting them to a broader public.

Why is this course relevant now?

Beyond public interest in paranormal topics, the paranormal is entwined with sociocultural forces that have dramatically increased the role of conspiracy rhetoric in the United States and elsewhere. At their core, both types of belief claim to have figured out some kind of supposedly hidden knowledge.

Furthermore, the conspiracy theories that are now commonplace in American political discourse are more rooted in paranormal ideas than in previous decades. Conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination or even 9/11 were still largely within the materialist realm. People argued that “the truth” had been covered up, but their arguments did not rely on metaphysical ideas. Today, major conspiracy theories involve secret cabals, mystical symbols and code words, demonic forces and extraterrestrial entities.

What’s a critical lesson from the course?

Evidence must be interrogated on its own, regardless of whether it fits your perspective. I find time and again that students have a hard time approaching evidence without bias, whether that bias is conscious or not: “knowing” that something must be true, or must be absurd.

One person apparently makes a death bed confession of faking a famous Loch Ness Monster photo, pleasing skeptics. Another claims to have seen a Bigfoot at close range, pleasing believers. Without further evidence, both are stories: no more, no less.

The issue isn’t to draw an equivalence between the bigger concepts. Not all narratives are equally well-founded. But students learn how to collect evidence, rather than simply rely on their gut sense of what is plausible or not.

What will the course prepare students to do?

This course is meant to help students discern useful and reliable information about claims and events, separating them from irrelevant or inaccurate narratives or sources. The goal is not just “critical thinking” aimed at combating disinformation, though that is part of what they should learn. Students practice evaluating evidence but also develop an approach for analyzing and understanding phenomena behind it: how factors like history, culture and institutions of authority, such as science and government, shape what people trust and what they believe.

Jeb Card, Associate Teaching Professor of Anthropology, Miami University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Space and Tech

News Brief: Blue Origin’s New Glenn Successfully Reaches Orbit on Historic NG-1 Mission

Published

4 days ago

January 27, 2025

Rod Washington

Cape Canaveral, FL – January 16, 2025 – In a remarkable achievement for commercial spaceflight, Blue Origin’s New Glenn rocket successfully reached orbit during its inaugural NG-1 mission today, marking a significant milestone for the company and the industry. The rocket’s second stage performed flawlessly, completing two successful burns with the BE-3U engines, achieving its intended orbital parameters.

Dave Limp, CEO of Blue Origin, expressed his pride in the team’s accomplishment, stating, “New Glenn achieved orbit on its first attempt! We set out with ambitious goals, and while we lost our booster during descent, we gained invaluable insights from today’s mission.” Limp highlighted the importance of New Glenn in supporting critical missions for customers, including NASA’s Artemis program, which aims to establish a sustained human presence on the Moon.

New Glenn

The New Glenn vehicle is pivotal for Blue Origin’s future launches, including the Blue Moon Mark 1 cargo lander and the Mark 2 crewed lander, which will serve NASA’s lunar objectives. In addition, the company is seeing strong demand, with various vehicles in production and a growing list of customers like NASA, Amazon’s Project Kuiper, and AST SpaceMobile.

Jarrett Jones, Senior Vice President of New Glenn, remarked on the significance of the day, saying, “Today marks a new era for Blue Origin and for commercial space. We’re ramping our launch cadence and are incredibly grateful to everyone at Blue Origin, our customers, and the space community for their unwavering support.”

The launch, which took place at 2:03 a.m. EST from Launch Complex 36, signals the beginning of a formidable era in Blue Origin’s operations as it seeks to connect its missions with emerging national security objectives through certification from the U.S. Space Force.

Blue Origin plans to conduct further missions with New Glenn, expanding its role in the growing landscape of space exploration and resource utilization. The company is focused on learning from today’s endeavor and aims to return for another launch attempt this spring.

Stay tuned for more updates on Blue Origin’s ambitious journeys ahead!

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Lifestyle

Biden helped bring science out of the lab and into the community − emphasizing research focused on solutions

Published

1 week ago

January 22, 2025

The Conversation

Arthur Daemmrich, Arizona State University

President Joe Biden was inaugurated in January 2021 amid a devastating pandemic, with over 24 million COVID-19 cases and more than 400,000 deaths in the U.S. recorded at that point.

Operation Warp Speed, initiated by the Trump administration in May 2020, meant an effective vaccine was becoming available. Biden quickly announced a plan to immunize 100 million Americans over the next three months. By the end of April 2021, 145 million Americans – nearly half the population – had received one vaccine dose, and 103 million were considered fully vaccinated. Science and technology policymakers celebrated this coordination across science, industry and government to address a real-world crisis as a 21st-century Manhattan Project.

From my perspective as a scholar of science and technology policy, Biden’s legacy includes structural, institutional and practical changes to how science is conducted. Building on approaches developed over the course of many years, the administration elevated the status of science in the government and fostered community participation in research.

Raising science’s profile in government

The U.S. has no single ministry of science and technology. Instead, agencies and offices across the executive branch carry out scientific research at several national labs and fund research by other institutions. By elevating the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to a Cabinet-level organization for the first time in its history, Biden gave the agency greater influence in federal decision-making and coordination.

Formally established in 1976, the agency provides the president and senior staff with scientific and technical advice, bringing science to bear on executive policies. Biden’s inclusion of the agency’s director in his Cabinet was a strong signal about the elevated role science and technology would play in the administration’s solutions to major societal challenges.

Under Biden, the Office of Science and Technology Policy established guidelines that agencies across the government would follow as they implemented major legislation. This included developing technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to address climate change, rebuilding America’s chip industry, and managing the rollout of AI technologies.

Close-up of gloved hand holding square semiconductor chip — The CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 boosted research and manufacture of semiconductor chips in the U.S. Narumon Bowonkitwanchai/Moment via Getty Images

Instead of treating the ethical and societal dimensions of scientific and technological change as separate from research and development, the agency advocated for a more integrated approach. This was reflected in the appointment of social scientist Alondra Nelson as the agency’s first deputy director for science and society, and science policy expert Kei Koizumi as principal deputy director for policy. Ethical and societal considerations were added as evaluation criteria for grants. And initiatives such as the AI bill of rights and frameworks for research integrity and open science further encouraged all federal agencies to consider the social effects of their research.

The Office of Science and Technology Policy also introduced new ways for agencies to consult with communities, including Native Nations, rural Americans and people of color, in order to avoid known biases in science and technology research. For example, the agency issued government-wide guidance to recognize and include Indigenous knowledge in federal programs. Agencies such as the Department of Energy have incorporated public perspectives while rolling out atmospheric carbon dioxide removal technologies and building new hydrogen hubs.

Use-inspired research

A long-standing criticism of U.S. science funding is that it often fails to answer questions of societal importance. Members of Congress and policy analysts have argued that funded projects instead overly emphasize basic research in areas that advance the careers of researchers.

In response, the Biden administration established the technology, innovation and partnerships directorate at the National Science Foundation in March 2022.

The directorate uses social science approaches to help focus scientific research and technology on their potential uses and effects on society. For example, engineers developing future energy technologies could start by consulting with the community about local needs and opportunities, rather than pitching their preferred solution after years of laboratory work. Genetic researchers could share both knowledge and financial benefits with the communities that provided the researchers with data.

Fundamentally, “use-inspired” research aims to reconnect scientists and engineers with the people and communities their work ultimately affects, going beyond publication in a journal accessible only to academics.

The technology, innovation and partnerships directorate established initiatives to support regional projects and multidisciplinary partnerships bringing together researchers, entrepreneurs and community organizations. These programs, such as the regional innovation engines and convergence accelerator, seek to balance the traditional process of grant proposals written and evaluated by academics with broader societal demand for affordable health and environmental solutions. This work is particularly key to parts of the country that have not yet seen visible gains from decades of federally sponsored research, such as regions encompassing western North Carolina, northern South Carolina, eastern Tennessee and southwest Virginia.

Community-based scientific research

The Biden administration also worked to involve communities in science not just as research consultants but also as active participants.

Scientific research and technology-based innovation are often considered the exclusive domain of experts from elite universities or national labs. Yet, many communities are eager to conduct research, and they have insights to contribute. There is a decades-long history of citizen science initiatives, such as birdwatchers contributing data to national environmental surveys and community groups collecting industrial emissions data that officials can use to make regulations more cost effective.

Going further, the Biden administration carried out experiments to create research projects in a way that involved community members, local colleges and federal agencies as more equal partners.

Hand-drawn signs displayed on a fence against a green field, with messages about climate change around a sign that reads 'It's our future' — Collaboration between the community, academia, industry and government can lead to more effective solutions. Deb Cohn-Orbach/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

For example, the Justice40 initiative asked people from across the country, including rural and small-town Americans, to identify local environmental justice issues and potential solutions.

The National Institutes of Health’s ComPASS program funded community organizations to test and scale successful health interventions, such as identifying pregnant women with complex medical needs and connecting them to specialized care.

And the National Science Foundation’s Civic Innovation Challenge required academic researchers to work with local organizations to address local concerns, improving the community’s technical skills and knowledge.

Frontiers of science and technology policy

Researchers often cite the 1945 report Science: The Endless Frontier, written by former Office of Scientific Research and Development head Vannevar Bush, to describe the core rationales for using American taxpayer money to fund basic science. Under this model, funding science would lead to three key outcomes: a secure national defense, improved health, and economic prosperity. The report, however, says little about how to go from basic science to desired societal outcomes. It also makes no mention of scientists sharing responsibility for the direction and impact of their work.

The 80th anniversary of Bush’s report in 2025 offers an opportunity to move science out into society. At present, major government initiatives are following a technology push model that focuses efforts on only one or a few products and involves little consideration of consumer and market demand. Research has repeatedly demonstrated that consumer or societal pull, which attracts development of products that enhance quality of life, is key to successful uptake of new technologies and their longevity.

Future administrations can further advance science and address major societal challenges by considering how ready society is to take up new technologies and increasing collaboration between government and civil society.

Arthur Daemmrich, Professor of Practice in the School for the Future of Innovation in Society, Arizona State University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.