New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

In NASA Study, Twin Astronauts Show Stresses of Space Travel

Early results from examinations of NASA's Scott and Mark Kelly reveal alterations to gene expression during spaceflight

NASA astronaut Scott Kelly (right) spent a year aboard the International Space Station without his twin brother, Mark, who is also an astronaut.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Preliminary results are in from NASA’s unprecedented twin study — a detailed probe of the genetic differences between astronaut Scott Kelly, who spent nearly a consecutive year in space, and his identical twin Mark. Measurements taken before, during and after Scott Kelly’s mission reveal changes in gene expression, DNA methylation and other biological markers that are likely attributable to his time in orbit.

From the lengths of the twins’ chromosomes to the microbiomes in their guts, “almost everyone is reporting that we see differences”, says Christopher Mason, a geneticist at Weill Cornell Medical College in New York City. He and other project scientists reported the early results on 26 January in Galveston, Texas, at a meeting of scientists working in NASA’s Human Research Program. “The data are so fresh that some of them are still coming off the sequencing machines,” Mason says.

The challenge now is to untangle how many of the observed changes are specific to the physical demands of spaceflight — and how many might be simply due to natural variations. And because the Kelly twins are just two people, the results may not be generalizable to others.


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.


Space case

Still, the work is some of the most detailed molecular profiling ever done, involving some of the most physically demanding environments. “The greatest importance of the study is to show that we can do it,” says team member Andrew Feinberg, a geneticist at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. “I don’t think people realized it would be so easy to do genomics on astronauts in space.”

Scott Kelly spent 340 days in space in 2015-2016, giving him a lifetime total of 520 days. Mark Kelly, also an astronaut, had previously flown in space for a total of 54 days over four space-shuttle missions between 2001 and 2011.

Because they have the same genome and similar life experiences, NASA arranged to have blood and other biological samples taken from the men to try and observe biological changes brought about by long-duration spaceflight.

DNA methylation — the reversible addition of a chemical marker that can affect gene expression — decreased in Scott during flight and increased in Mark over the same period, Feinberg says. Levels for both men returned close to pre-flight levels after Scott came back to Earth. What this means isn’t yet clear, Feinberg says.

Mason’s team also reported changes in gene-expression signatures between the twins. Such changes happen in earthbound people all the time, associated with environmental shifts such as changes in diet and sleep habits. But the changes in Scott seemed to be larger than normal — perhaps due to the stress of eating freeze dried food and trying to sleep while floating in space.

Data splashdown?

Personalized medicine could play into NASA’s plans for how to keep astronauts healthy during long-duration spaceflight, such as any future trips to Mars. For instance, the agency might want to use genetic tests to screen astronaut candidates for cancer susceptibility, says a 6 January report from the US National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine.

Actually publishing the results of the twin study will take some time, and the full data may never come out. Because of the detailed nature and sheer amount of the genetic information involved in the studies, the Kelly twins will review all information prior to being published, in order to avoid revealing sensitive data they may wish to keep private.

“We’re working with a small number of highly identifiable people here,” John Charles, head of NASA’s human research programme, told the meeting.

This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on January 26, 2017.

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

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe