Snow Melt May Have Carved Martian Gullies

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.

The Mars Global Surveyor (MGS) first caught the Red Planet's mysterious gullies on camera in 2000. Since then, numerous explanations have been proposed for the erosion--which marks the edges of craters and cliff sides on Mars--including seeping groundwater and pressurized flowing liquid water or carbon dioxide. Now a paper published online this week by the journal Nature suggests that water from melting snow packs could be the culprit.

Using images from both NASA's Mars Odyssey spacecraft and the MGS as a guide, Philip R. Christensen of Arizona State University theorizes that water was transported from the poles toward the mid-latitudes when the planet's axis was tilted closer to the sun. The resulting water-rich snow layer formed there later began to melt as Mars's axis moved farther away from the sun. This melting yielded gully-carving liquid water that flowed beneath an insulating layer of snow. (The image above, taken by the MGS, shows numerous gullies on the wall of a Martian crater. The arrow points to a remnant of a snowpack.) According to the model, the trenches were etched over a period of 5,000 years approximately 100,000 years ago.

The new hypothesis does not yet close the book on Mars's mysterious gullies. But one of its strengths, Christensen notes, is that it can explain the formation of gullies in strange, isolated places where it would be particularly hard for groundwater to seep to the surface. "The suggestion put forward for the processes that gave rise to the gully formation is a plausible one, and I think it's the most consistent explanation with the observations so far," comments Bruce Jakosky of the University of Colorado, Boulder. "It's not a proven idea yet, but it's one we can explore over the next couple of years. I think we'll see a lot of attention focused on it."

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