Engineering topics

Kiang, Nancy Y.

Publications and source records attributed to Kiang, Nancy Y..

14 records

NASA NTRS2019

Climates of Warm Earth-Like Planets III: Fractional Habitability from a Water Cycle Perspective

The habitable fraction of a planet's surface is important for the detectability of surface biosignatures. The extent and distribution of habitable areas are influenced by external parameters that control the planet's climate, atmospheric circulation, and hydrological cycle. We explore these issues using the ROCKE-3D general circulation model, focusing on terrestrial water fluxes and thus the potential for the existence of complex life on land. Habitability is examined as a function of insolation and planet rotation for an Earth-like world with zero obliquity and eccentricity orbiting the Sun. We assess fractional habitability using an aridity index that measures the net supply of water to the land. Earth-like planets become "superhabitable" (a larger habitable surface area than Earth) as insolation and day-length increase because their climates become more equable, reminiscent of past warm periods on Earth when complex life was abundant and widespread. The most slowly rotating, most highly irradiated planets, though, occupy a hydrological regime unlike any on Earth, with extremely warm, humid conditions at high latitudes but little rain and subsurface water storage. Clouds increasingly obscure the surface as insolation increases, but visibility improves for modest increases in rotation period. Thus, moderately slowly rotating rocky planets with insolation near or somewhat greater than modern Earth's appear to be promising targets for surface characterization by a future direct imaging mission.

Del Genio, Anthony D.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Life's Requirements

Life on Earth is molecular in nature, with its lifelike attributes- e.g., information processing and catalysis- emerging as a result of both the specific properties of those molecules and the interactions among them. If this is a general model for life, then life must require (i) a source of energy, with which to build and sustain molecular complexity and information processing; (ii) elemental raw materials, from which to construct molecules having specific properties and reactivity; (iii)a solvent that supports the synthesis of the full range of molecules required by life and properly mediates the full range of necessary interactions among those molecules; and (iv) physicochemical conditions in which life's molecules can be synthesized, are appropriately stable, and can interact as needed for lifelike function. For life on Earth, these general requirements, respectively, take the specific form: (i) light energy in visible-to-near-infrared wavelengths or chemical energy as provided by oxidationâ€“reduction disequilibrium, (ii) the "biogenic "elements (carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur) (iii)liquid water, and (iv) specific ranges in temperature, pH, salinity, pressure, and other environmental factors. Our knowledge of these factors relates to cellula rlife as we observe it now or can infer from the fossil or molecular records. Life's origin may be constrained by a more stringent set of requirements that are, as yet,not fully understood.

Habitability↗

NASA NTRS2018

Exoplanet Biosignatures: At the Dawn of a New Era of Planetary Observations

The rapid rate of discoveries of exoplanets has expanded the scope of the science possible for the remote detection of life beyond Earth. The Exoplanet Biosignatures Workshop-Without-Walls (EBWWW) held in 2016 engaged the international scientific community across diverse scientific disciplines, to assess the state of the science and technology in the search for life on exoplanets, and to identify paths for progress. The workshop activities resulted in five (5) major review papers which provide: 1) an encyclopedic review of known and proposed biosignatures and models used to ascertain them; 2) an in-depth review of O2 as a biosignature, rigorously examining the nuances of false positives and negatives for evidence of life; 3) a Bayesian framework to comprehensively organize current understanding to quantify confidence in biosignature assessments; 4) an extension of that Bayesian framework in anticipation of increasing planetary data and novel concepts of biosignatures, and 5) a review of the upcoming telescope capabilities to characterize exoplanets and their environment. Because of the immense content of these review papers, this summary provides a guide to their complementary scope and highlights salient features. Strong themes that emerged from the workshop were that biosignatures must be interpreted in the context of their environment, and that frameworks must be developed to link diverse forms of scientific understanding of that context to quantify the likelihood that a biosignature has been observed. Models are needed to explore the parameter space where measurements will be widespread but sparse in detail. Given the technological prospects for large ground-based telescopes and direct imaging from space-based observatories, the detection of atmospheric signatures of a few potentially habitable planets may come before 2030.

spectral imaging↗

NASA NTRS2018

Exoplanet Biosignatures: Future Directions

We introduce a Bayesian method for guiding future directions for detection of life on exoplanets. We describe empirical and theoretical work necessary to place constraints on the relevant likelihoods, including those emerging from better understanding stellar environment, planetary climate and geophysics, geochemical cycling, the universalities of physics and chemistry, the contingencies of evolutionary history, the properties of life as an emergent complex system, and the mechanisms driving the emergence of life. We provide examples for how the Bayesian formalism could guide future search strategies, including determining observations to prioritize or deciding between targeted searches or larger lower resolution surveys to generate ensemble statistics and address how a Bayesian methodology could constrain the prior probability of life with or without a positive detection.

Bayesian analysis↗

NASA NTRS2018

Exoplanet Biosignatures: A Review of Remotely Detectable Signs of Life

In the coming years and decades, advanced space- and ground-based observatories will allow an unprecedented opportunity to probe the atmospheres and surfaces of potentially habitable exoplanets for signatures of life. Life on Earth, through its gaseous products and reflectance and scattering properties, has left its fingerprint on the spectrum of our planet. Aided by the universality of the laws of physics and chemistry, we turn to Earth's biosphere, both in the present and through geologic time, for analog signatures that will aid in the search for life elsewhere. Considering the insights gained from modern and ancient Earth, and the broader array of hypothetical exoplanet possibilities, we have compiled a comprehensive overview of our current understanding of potential exoplanet biosignatures, including gaseous, surface, and temporal biosignatures. We additionally survey biogenic spectral features that are well known in the specialist literature but have not yet been robustly vetted in the context of exoplanet biosignatures. We briefly review advances in assessing biosignature plausibility, including novel methods for determining chemical disequilibrium from remotely obtainable data and assessment tools for determining the minimum biomass required to maintain short-lived biogenic gases as atmospheric signatures. We focus particularly on advances made since the seminal review by Des Marais et al. The purpose of this work is not to propose new biosignature strategies, a goal left to companion articles in this series, but to review the current literature, draw meaningful connections between seemingly disparate areas, and clear the way for a path forward.

biosignatures↗

NASA NTRS2018

Life Beyond the Solar System: Remotely Detectable Biosignatures

For the first time in human history, we will soon be able to apply to the scientific method to the question "Are We Alone?" The rapid advance of exoplanet discovery, planetary systems science, and telescope technology will soon allow scientists to search for life beyond our Solar System through direct observation of extrasolar planets. This endeavor will occur alongside searches for habitable environments and signs of life within our Solar System. While these searches are thematically related and will inform each other, they will require separate observational techniques. The search for life on exoplanets holds potential through the great diversity of worlds to be explored beyond our Solar System. However, there are also unique challenges related to the relatively limited data this search will obtain on any individual world.

Domagal-Goldman, Shawn↗

NASA NTRS2017

NExSS/NAI Joint ExoPAG SAG 16 Report on Remote Biosignatures for Exoplanets

Future exoplanet observations will soon focus on the search for life beyond the Solar System. Exoplanet biosignatures to be sought are those with global, potentially detectable, impacts on a planet. Biosignatures occur in an environmental context in which geological, atmospheric, and stellar processes and interactions may work to enhance, suppress or mimic these biosignatures. Thus biosignature scienceis inherently interdisciplinary. Its advance is necessary to inform the design of the next flagship missions that will obtain spectra of habitable extrasolar planets. The NExSS NAI Joint Exoplanet Biosignatures Workshop Without Walls brought together the astrobiology, exoplanet, and mission concept communities to review, discuss, debate, and advance the science of remote detection of planetary biosignatures. The multi-meeting workshop began in June 2016, and was a process that engaged a broad range of experts across the interdisciplinary reaches of NASA's Nexus for Exoplanet System Science (NExSS) program, the NASA Astrobiology Institute (NAI), NASAs Exoplanet Exploration Program (ExEP), and international partners, such as the European Astrobiology Network Association (EANA) and Japans Earth Life Science Institute (ELSI). These groups spanned expertise in astronomy, planetary science, Earth sciences, heliophysics, biology, instrument mission development, and engineering.

Kiang, Nancy Y.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Biosignatures of Exoplanets

Are we alone? Ancient astronomers across the continents knew the existence of five Solar System planets visible to the naked eye. They could tell that these celestial wanderers were unlike stars in that they only reflected light from the Sun. In the early 1600s, Galileo developed the first telescopes able to observe spots moving across the Sun and the passage of moons across the face of Jupiter. He verified the theory of Aristarchus (3rd c. BC), and refined by Nicolaus Copernicus (mid 16th c.) and Johannes Kepler (late 16th c.), that the Earth and the other planets, in fact, orbit the Sun and not the other way around. Around the same time, Dominican friar Giordano Bruno wondered about the possibility of life on other worlds orbiting other suns (and was burned at the stake for this and other heresies).

Kiang, Nancy Y.↗

NASA NTRS2017

Biosignatures of Exoplanets

There was a time during Western civilization when musing about worlds other than Earth could be life-threatening. In 1600 Giordano Bruno was burnt at the stake as a heretic for claiming, amongst other things, that the fixed stars were in fact suns with planets moving around them, and furthermore, that lifeforms similar to those on Earth might exist on these planets. Although these ideas were not the result of scientific observation but rather of philosophical reflexions, Giordano Bruno is today recognized as the father of the idea of exoplanets. The study of planets revolving around distant stars has become one of the most thrilling disciplines in astronomy. As it did 400 years ago, this subject touches on the most profound questions of mankind, including the uniqueness of the planet Earth and even our own uniqueness as an intelligent species. As always in astronomy distance is an issue. While it requires a lot of patience to reach the planets within our own solar system, direct visits to exoplanets will not be feasible in the foreseeable future. Is there an alternative approach to find a second Earth?

Kiang, Nancy Y.↗

NASA NTRS2016

2016 International Land Model Benchmarking (ILAMB) Workshop Report

As earth system models (ESMs) become increasingly complex, there is a growing need for comprehensive and multi-faceted evaluation of model projections. To advance understanding of terrestrial biogeochemical processes and their interactions with hydrology and climate under conditions of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide, new analysis methods are required that use observations to constrain model predictions, inform model development, and identify needed measurements and field experiments. Better representations of biogeochemistryclimate feedbacks and ecosystem processes in these models are essential for reducing the acknowledged substantial uncertainties in 21st century climate change projections.

earth system models (ESMs)↗

NASA NTRS2015

Spin-Up and Tuning of the Global Carbon Cycle Model Inside the GISS ModelE2 GCM

Planetary carbon cycle involves multiple phenomena, acting at variety of temporal and spacial scales. The typical times range from minutes for leaf stomata physiology to centuries for passive soil carbon pools and deep ocean layers. So, finding a satisfactory equilibrium state becomes a challenging and computationally expensive task. Here we present the spin-up processes for different configurations of the GISS Carbon Cycle model from the model forced with MODIS observed Leaf Area Index (LAI) and prescribed ocean to the prognostic LAI and to the model fully coupled to the dynamic ocean and ocean biology. We investigate the time it takes the model to reach the equilibrium and discuss the ways to speed up this process. NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies General Circulation Model (GISS ModelE2) is currently equipped with all major algorithms necessary for the simulation of the Global Carbon Cycle. The terrestrial part is presented by Ent Terrestrial Biosphere Model (Ent TBM), which includes leaf biophysics, prognostic phenology and soil biogeochemistry module (based on Carnegie-Ames-Stanford model). The ocean part is based on the NASA Ocean Biogeochemistry Model (NOBM). The transport of atmospheric CO2 is performed by the atmospheric part of ModelE2, which employs quadratic upstream algorithm for this purpose.

Climate model↗

NASA NTRS2014

Configuration and Assessment of the GISS ModelE2 Contributions to the CMIP5 Archive

We present a description of the ModelE2 version of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) General Circulation Model (GCM) and the configurations used in the simulations performed for the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5). We use six variations related to the treatment of the atmospheric composition, the calculation of aerosol indirect effects, and ocean model component. Specifically, we test the difference between atmospheric models that have noninteractive composition, where radiatively important aerosols and ozone are prescribed from precomputed decadal averages, and interactive versions where atmospheric chemistry and aerosols are calculated given decadally varying emissions. The impact of the first aerosol indirect effect on clouds is either specified using a simple tuning, or parameterized using a cloud microphysics scheme. We also use two dynamic ocean components: the Russell and HYbrid Coordinate Ocean Model (HYCOM) which differ significantly in their basic formulations and grid. Results are presented for the climatological means over the satellite era (1980-2004) taken from transient simulations starting from the preindustrial (1850) driven by estimates of appropriate forcings over the 20th Century. Differences in base climate and variability related to the choice of ocean model are large, indicating an important structural uncertainty. The impact of interactive atmospheric composition on the climatology is relatively small except in regions such as the lower stratosphere, where ozone plays an important role, and the tropics, where aerosol changes affect the hydrological cycle and cloud cover. While key improvements over previous versions of the model are evident, these are not uniform across all metrics.

ocean model↗

NASA NTRS2014

CMIP5 Historical Simulations (1850-2012) with GISS ModelE2

Observations of climate change during the CMIP5 extended historical period (1850-2012) are compared to trends simulated by six versions of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies ModelE2 Earth System Model. The six models are constructed from three versions of the ModelE2 atmospheric general circulation model, distinguished by their treatment of atmospheric composition and the aerosol indirect effect, combined with two ocean general circulation models, HYCOM and Russell. Forcings that perturb the model climate during the historical period are described. Five-member ensemble averages from each of the six versions of ModelE2 simulate trends of surface air temperature, atmospheric temperature, sea ice and ocean heat content that are in general agreement with observed trends, although simulated warming is slightly excessive within the past decade. Only simulations that include increasing concentrations of long-lived greenhouse gases match the warming observed during the twentieth century. Differences in twentieth-century warming among the six model versions can be attributed to differences in climate sensitivity, aerosol and ozone forcing, and heat uptake by the deep ocean. Coupled models with HYCOM export less heat to the deep ocean, associated with reduced surface warming in regions of deepwater formation, but greater warming elsewhere at high latitudes along with reduced sea ice. All ensembles show twentieth-century annular trends toward reduced surface pressure at southern high latitudes and a poleward shift of the midlatitude westerlies, consistent with observations.

ocean heat content↗

NASA NTRS2012

Photosystem Trap Energies and Spectrally-Dependent Energy-Storage Efficiencies in the Chl d-Utilizing Cyanobacterium, Acaryochloris Marina

Acaryochloris marina is the only species known to utilize chlorophyll (Chl) d as a principal photopigment. The peak absorption wavelength of Chl d is redshifted approx. 40 nm in vivo relative to Chl a, enabling this cyanobacterium to perform oxygenic phototrophy in niche environments enhanced in far-red light. We present measurements of the in vivo energy-storage (E-S) efficiency of photosynthesis in A. marina, obtained using pulsed photoacoustics (PA) over a 90-nm range of excitation wavelengths in the red and far-red. Together with modeling results, these measurements provide the first direct observation of the trap energies of PSI and PSII, and also the photosystem-specific contributions to the total E-S efficiency. We find the maximum observed efficiency in A. marina (40+/-1% at 735 nm) is higher than in the Chl a cyanobacterium Synechococcus leopoliensis (35+/-1% at 690 nm). The efficiency at peak absorption wavelength is also higher in A. marina (36+/-1% at 710 nm vs. 31+/-1% at 670 nm). In both species, the trap efficiencies are approx. 40% (PSI) and approx. 30% (PSII). The PSI trap in A. marina is found to lie at 740+/-5 nm, in agreement with the value inferred from spectroscopic methods. The best fit of the model to the PA data identifies the PSII trap at 723+/-3 nm, supporting the view that the primary electron-donor is Chl d, probably at the accessory (ChlD1) site. A decrease in efficiency beyond the trap wavelength, consistent with uphill energy transfer, is clearly observed and fit by the model. These results demonstrate that the E-S efficiency in A. marina is not thermodynamically limited, suggesting that oxygenic photosynthesis is viable in even redder light environments.

Mielke, Steven P.↗