Veins, not Flowers, on Mars

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The 'John Klein' rock surface, target for drilling. Scale of image is approximately 1 meter across. Image has been white-balanced to mimic Earth-illumination (NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS)

NASA's Curiosity rover is preparing to drill for the first time, into what appears to be sedimentary rock criss-crossed by mineral-filled veins.

 


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.


 

 

 

Back in September last year the Mars Science Laboratory carried by the rover found a rocky outcrop on the wall of Gale Crater that was full of a crusty mix of cemented pebbles. It matched signs of an alluvial-fan feature seen from orbit and was some of the very best evidence so far of significant historical water flow across the martian surface.

Light color mineral veins in martian rock - a strong clue to a water soaked past (NASA/JPL)

Now Curiosity has entered Yellowknife Bay, a terrain that exhibits all the signs of a different type of water presence. In fact this depression in the landscape seems to be entirely distinct from the earlier Gale Crater landing site about 500 meters away.

Here sedimentary rocks (formed from the crushed remains of earlier rocks) are filled with fractures and veins of what might be hydrated calcium sulfate (bassinite or gypsum) - deposited when water soaked this area. There are also nodules of deposited material, cross-bedded layering, and even a rather shiny pebble embedded in sandstone that's provoked our human pattern recognition system into thinking there's a martian 'flower' popping from the ground.

It's the perfect place for a spot of prospecting.

Over the next few days to weeks Curiosity will try out its drill, attached to the end of its 7-foot robotic arm. The drill has a bore depth of about 5 cm, enough to get well past the weathered crust of these rocks and to retrieve the grindings of an ancient martian environment.

The drill with 'bit' attached. Cylindrical sheath channels material up for collection. (NASA/JPL)

It's not an easy task. There are concerns that a Teflon coating on the drill bit may flake off - contaminating any samples. So the first task will be to sacrifice a small amount of the upper layers of rock as an abrasive 'cleaning' material for the drill - getting rid of any Earthly contaminants before going deeper.

Once it does we'll have a new window onto Mars' deep past.

'John Klein' site in raw color (NASA/JPL-Caltech/MSSS)

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