New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Life May Have Started 300 Million Years Earlier Than Thought

Potentially ancient carbon sparks debate about when the first microorganisms appeared on Earth

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The stable isotope ratio of carbon is often used as an indicator of life in old rock samples. A high carbon-12 to carbon-13 ratio suggests the carbon has been processed by living organisms, because some metabolic enzymes involved in fixing inorganic carbon ‘prefer’ carbon-12. In this case, the carbon sample came from two microscopic specks of graphite embedded in a sliver of zircon, one of hundreds of zircons from the Jack Hills of Western Australia, which are thought to contain some of the oldest minerals on Earth.

After spotting the graphite inclusions, researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles in the US measured their isotopic make up using secondary ion mass spectrometry, shooting a beam of caesium ions onto the surface of the graphite. ‘We used the caesium ion beam to drill through the [zircon] surface and into the graphite, such that the graphite was never exposed to contaminants prior to analysis,’ says Elizabeth Bell, who was part of the team.

The team’s analysis showed that the carbon in the sample was enriched in carbon-12 by around 2%, compared with carbon in the Earth as a whole. ‘Since living organisms tend to concentrate carbon-12, this is a potential signature of life,’ Bell says. Given that the zircon sample is 4.1 billion years old, and the enclosed graphite even older, she adds, this could be evidence that life on Earth started hundreds of millions of years earlier than is currently thought. The observations could also offer new insights into what Earth was like during the Hadean eon, 4– 4.6 billion years ago.


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.


‘Although the previous view of the Earth’s first few hundred million years … was that of a sterile, dry, hot planet under heavy meteorite bombardment, evidence from Hadean zircons has provided a new picture of a much more hospitable planet more like the Earth of today in many respects,’ says Bell.  ‘For instance, the zircons’ low crystallisation temperatures and enrichment in oxygen-18 suggest the presence of liquid water.’

Alternative mechanism
‘If it turns out that the carbon indeed comes from microorganisms, this would push back the record of life by 300 million years,’ says geomicrobiologist Andreas Kappler from Tübingen University in Germany, who was not involved in the study. ‘However, it also has to be kept in mind that they found these inclusions only in one out of 565 zircons and – as the authors also acknowledge – abiotic processes can lead to a similar isotope fractionation.’

It is true that there are processes that don’t involve living organisms that could lead to a similar isotope ratio being observed, Bell explains. But she also points out that any mechanism for concentrating this carbon in graphite form and trapping it in a zircon with the geochemical characteristics of this particular sample would be incredibly complicated, perhaps unfeasibly so.

The best way to settle the debate will be to find and measure more samples of carbon in other ancient rocks, Bell says. ‘With, for instance, 1000 samples spanning 3.8 to 4.4Ga [billion years old], we could start to see patterns in the data to make a much more solid case for Hadean life and to constrain the Hadean carbon cycle in general.

‘Zircons older than 3.8Ga make up around 5% of the Jack Hills zircon population, so there is plenty of material to continue the search.’

This article is reproduced with permission from Chemistry World. The article was first published on October 20, 2015.

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