Crystal Study Counters Case for Former Life on Mars

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


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.


Five years ago, NASA scientists announced a remarkable discovery. A potato-size meteorite from Mars known as ALH84001, they said, contained evidence that the Red Planet once harbored primitive life forms. Not surprisingly, the assertion ignited a firestorm of controversy. Since then, three of the four original lines of evidence for ancient Martian life have been dismissed. Now new research may put the final nail in the coffin. According to a report published in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, tiny magnetite crystals in the meteorite that were claimed to mirror those produced by certain terrestrial bacteria in fact exhibit no such unique resemblance.

Using an improved transmission electron microscope technology not available when the original analysis of the famed Martian meteorite was first conducted, Peter R. Buseck of Arizona State University and colleagues re-examined the three-dimensional shapes of the known bacterial nanocrystals. The morphologies they observed differed considerably from those described in the original report. Furthermore, the crystals of the various strains differed from one another, and none uniquely matched those reported from the meteorite. These findings call into question whether the forms of the meteoritic crystals are accurately known and suggest that any similarities between the meteoritic crystals and bacterial ones could simply be chance resemblances. In fact, the researchers write, "current knowledge about the magnetic crystals in ALH84001, when examined critically, is inadequate to support the proposed former existence of extraterrestrial life."

The next step, Buseck's team notes, is to subject the meteorite's magnetite crystals to the same rigorous measurement and reconstruction methods they describe. "Because it seems that the magnetite nanocrystals in ALH84001 are the only remaining, potentially definitive indicators of former life on Mars," the authors conclude, "such careful work is justified, and indeed, demanded."

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe