Breathing Easy Thanks to the Great Oxidation Event
A report in the journal Nature reveals one of the reasons why Earth's atmosphere went from oxygen-poor to habitable 2.4 billion years ago--a drop in oceanic nickel killed microbes that produce methane. Cynthia Graber reports
SUBSCRIBE TO Science Quickly
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]
The Earth’s original atmosphere would have been unpleasant—deadly in fact—to any organisms that breathe oxygen. There wasn’t any. Not until about 2.4 billion years ago anyway. That’s the time of what scientists call the Great Oxidation Event. Now researchers believe they’ve found clues as to what may have caused the change. They published their report in the April 9 edition of the journal Nature.
Researchers analyzed trace elements in sedimentary rock from dozens of sites. Turns out nickel was 400 times more abundant in primordial oceans than in today’s waters. Microorganisms called methanogens love nickel-rich water, and they release methane into the atmosphere. Methane prevents a buildup of oxygen.
Scientists testing the rocks saw that around 2.7 to 2.4 billion years ago, ocean-dissolved nickel dropped off. This corresponds to the Great Oxidation Event. Lack of nickel could have killed off methanogens and left room for algae and other life forms that release oxygen during photosynthesis.
Researchers don’t know exactly why nickel decreased—possibly because of the cooling and solidifying of the Earth’s mantle. But the nickel disappearance is one more clue about how the planet went from suffocating to a place where a terrestrial tetrapod could take a deep breath.
—Cynthia Graber
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber
