The CanMars Mars Sample Return analogue mission

Osinski, G. R.; Battler, M.; Caudill, C. M.; Francis, Raymond; Haltigin, T.; Hipkin, V.; Kerrigan, M. C.; Pilles, E. A.; Pontefract, A.; Tornabene, L. L.; Allard, Pierre; Bakambu, J.N.; Balachandran, Katiyayni; Beaty, D. W.; Bednář, Daniel; Bina, A.; Bourassa, M.; Cao, F.; Christoffersen, Peter; Choe, Byung-Hun; Cloutis, E. A.; Cote, Kristen; Cross, Michael; D'Aoust, B.; Draz, Omar; Dudley, Bryce; Duff, Shamus; Dzamba, Tom; Fulford, P.; Godin, E.; Goordial, Jacqueline; Galofre, Anna Grau; Haid, Taylor; Harrington, Elise M.; Harrison, Tanya N.; Hickson, D. C.; Hill, P. J. A.; Innis, Liam; King, Derek; Kissi, Jonathan; Laughton, Joshua; Li, Yaozhu; Lymer, Elizabeth A.; Maggiori, Catherine; Maloney, M.; Marion, C. L.; Maris, John; Mcfadden, Sarah; McLennan, Scott M.; Mittelholz, A.; Morse, Z. R.; Newman, J. D.; O’Callaghan, Jonathan; Pascual, Alexis; Patel, Parshati; Picard, Martin; Pritchard, I. M.; Poitras, Jordan; Ryan, Catheryn; Sapers, H. M.; Silber, E. A.; Simpson, Sarah; Sopoco, Racel; Svensson, Matthew; Tolometti, G. D.; Uribe, Diego; Wilks, R. P. A.; Williford, Kenneth H.; Xie, Tianqi; Zylberman, W.

doi:10.1016/j.pss.2018.07.011

Cited by 28 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Linear Team planned a traverse and potential sites for data acquisition based on a linear approach, whereas the Walkabout Team did the same, based on a walkabout approach. The Tiger Team also used orbital data to preplan how they would approach the site based on standard geological field methods; their work thus served as a baseline set of decisions and results that facilitated direct comparison between results using rover-driven methods and those achieved by a traditional terrestrial field exercise (e.g., Osinski et al, 2019). The Linear, Walkabout, and Tiger Teams each were composed of one individual with significant rover operations experience and one individual with expertise in sedimentology.…”

Section: Personnel and Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A common approach used to assess the efficacy of various methods of remote geological exploration and sampling is to study a terrestrial site that is analogous to the pertinent characteristics of the target extraterrestrial site, using rovers, communication systems, and other equipment similar to that used in remote exploration (Greeley et al, 1994;Whittaker et al, 1997;Arvidson et al, 2000;Stoker et al, 2001Stoker et al, , 2002Lee et al, 2007;Fong et al, 2010;Eppler et al, 2013;Graham et al, 2015;Lim et al, 2018;Osinski et al, 2019). Although this method has shown success when the goal is to test technology (e.g., Zacny et al, 2011;Mueller et al, 2013;Sanders and Larson, 2015), it has proven more difficult when testing the decision-making process of conducting science remotely.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is a Linear or a Walkabout Protocol More Efficient When Using a Rover to Choose Biologically Relevant Samples in a Small Region of Interest?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We conducted a field test at a potential Mars analog site to provide insight into planning for future robotic missions such as Mars 2020, where science operations must facilitate efficient choice of biologically relevant sampling locations. We compared two data acquisition and decision-making protocols currently used by Mars Science Laboratory: (1) a linear approach, where sites are examined as they are encountered and (2) a walkabout approach, in which the field site is first examined with remote rover instruments to gain an understanding of regional context followed by deployment of time-and power-intensive contact and sampling instruments on a smaller subset of locations. The walkabout method was advantageous in terms of both the time required to execute and a greater confidence in results and interpretations, leading to enhanced ability to tailor follow-on observations to better address key science and sampling goals. This advantage is directly linked to the walkabout method's ability to provide broad geological context earlier in the science analysis process. For Mars 2020, and specifically for small regions to be explored (e.g., <1 km 2), we recommend that the walkabout approach be considered where possible, to provide early context and time for the science team to develop a coherent suite of hypotheses and robust ways to test them.

show abstract

Section: Personnel and Data Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is a Linear or a Walkabout Protocol More Efficient When Using a Rover to Choose Biologically Relevant Samples in a Small Region of Interest?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The geology and characteristics of the immediate site area are described in detail in Beaty et al, 2019 (this issue). The region sampled corresponds to the SCYLD region of the rover traverse, a region containing the topographical feature referred to as Ragnarok (Osinski et al, 2019), a large eroded mound of nearly flat lying units of variable colored sediments (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Site Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The site is dominated by inverted fluvial channels and the mission was termed the CanMars Mars Sample Return Analogue Deployment (MSRAD). The operational aspects of this program are described in companion papers in this special issue and were based on the Phoenix and MER (Mars Exploration Rover) missions using the Mars Exploration Science Rover (MESR) and a suite of handheld and integrated instruments to mimic the Mars2020 rover payload (Caudill et al, 2019a,b;Osinski et al, 2019;Pilles et al, 2019). Two of the main objectives of this deployment was to assess the astrobiological significance of the field site in terms of organic carbon and evidence of water, as well as the ability of different analytical techniques to be employed by the Mars2020 rover to characterize targets of interest at the deployment site, more specifically how well such instruments can characterize geological samples and detect and characterize any biosignatures (Caudill et al, 2019a,b;Osinski et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Biosignature detection by Mars rover equivalent instruments in samples from the CanMars Mars Sample Return Analogue Deployment

Stromberg

Parkinson

Morison

et al. 2019

Planetary and Space Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work details the laboratory analysis of a suite of 10 samples collected from an inverted fluvial channel near Hanksville, Utah, USA as a part of the CanMars Mars Sample Return Analogue Deployment (MSRAD). The samples were acquired along the rover traverse for detailed off-site analysis to evaluate the TOC and astrobiological significance of the samples selected based on site observations, and to address one of the science goals of the CanMars mission: to evaluate the ability of different analytical techniques being employed by the Mars2020 mission to detect and characterize any present biosignatures. Analytical techniques analogous to those on the ExoMars, MSL and the MER rovers were also applied to the samples. The total organic carbon content of the samples was <0.02% for all but 4 samples, and organic biosignatures were detected in multiple samples by UV-Vis-NIR reflectance spectroscopy and Raman spectroscopy (532 nm, time-resolved, and UV), which was the most effective of the techniques. The total carbon content of the samples is < 0.3 wt% for all but one calcite rich sample, and organic C was not detectable by FTIR. Carotene and chlorophyll were detected in two samples which also contained gypsum and mineral phases of astrobiological importance for paleoenvironment/habitability and biomarker preservation (clays, gypsum, calcite) were detected and characterized by multiple techniques, of which passive reflectance was most effective. The sample selected in the field (S2) as having the highest potential for TOC did not have the highest TOC values, however, when considering the sample mineralogy in conjunction with the detection of organic carbon, it is the most astrobiologically relevant. These results highlight importance of applying multiple techniques for sample characterization and provide insights into their strengths and limitations.

show abstract

“…Several simulated missions have been developed in the past decade, such as the NASA DESERT-RATS (Abercromby et al, 2013), the NASA HI-SEAS (Binsted et al, 2013;Binsted et al, 2015;Häuplik-Meusburger et al, 2017), the ESA CAVES (Bessone et al, 2015), MOON-WALK (Imhof et al, 2015;Vögele, 2016), MARS-500 (Poláčková Š olcová et al, 2016), and others (West et al, 2010;Steele et al, 2011). Recent analog field campaigns include MARS 160 (Knightly et al, 2018), BASALT (Beaton et al, 2018), PANGEA (Sauro et al, 2018;ESA, 2019), FELDSPAR (Stockton et al, 2017), CANMARS (Caudill et al, 2019;Osinski et al, 2019), and D-MARS (Rubinstein et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%