The legacy of Biosphere 2 for the study of biospherics and closed ecological systems.

The unprecedented challenges of creating Biosphere 2, the world's first laboratory for biospherics, the study of global ecology and long-term closed ecological system dynamics, led to breakthrough developments in many fields, and a deeper understanding of the opportunities and difficulties of material closure. This paper will review accomplishments and challenges, citing some of the key research findings and publications that have resulted from the experiments in Biosphere 2. Engineering accomplishments included development of a technique for variable volume to deal with pressure differences between the facility and outside environment, developing methods of atmospheric leak detection and sealing, while achieving new standards of closure, with an annual atmospheric leakrate of less than 10%, or less than 300 ppm per day. This degree of closure permitted detailed tracking of carbon dioxide, oxygen, and trace gases such as nitrous oxide and ethylene over the seasonal variability of two years. Full closure also necessitated developing new approaches and technologies for complete air, water, and wastewater recycle and reuse within the facility. The development of a soil-based highly productive agricultural system was a first in closed ecological systems, and much was learned about managing a wide variety of crops using non-chemical means of pest and disease control. Closed ecological systems have different temporal biogeochemical cycling and ranges of atmospheric components because of their smaller reservoirs of air, water and soil, and higher concentration of biomass, and Biosphere 2 provided detailed examination and modeling of these accelerated cycles over a period of closure which measured in years. Medical research inside Biosphere 2 included the effects on humans of lowered oxygen: the discovery that human productivity can be maintained with good health with lowered atmospheric oxygen levels could lead to major economies on the design of space stations and planetary/lunar settlements. The improved health resulting from the calorie-restricted but nutrient dense Biosphere 2 diet was the first such scientifically controlled experiment with humans. The success of Biosphere 2 in creating a diversity of terrestrial and marine environments, from rainforest to coral reef, allowed detailed studies with comprehensive measurements such that the dynamics of these complex biomic systems are now better understood. The coral reef ecosystem, the largest artificial reef ever built, catalyzed methods of study now being applied to planetary coral reef systems. Restoration ecology advanced through the creation and study of the dynamics of adaptation and self-organization of the biomes in Biosphere 2. The international interest that Biosphere 2 generated has given new impetus to the public recognition of the sciences of biospheres (biospherics), biomes and closed ecological life systems. The facility, although no longer a materially-closed ecological system, is being used as an educational facility by Columbia University as an introduction to the study of the biosphere and complex system ecology and for carbon dioxide impacts utilizing the complex ecosystems created in Biosphere '.The many lessons learned from Biosphere 2 are being used by its key team of creators in their design and operation of a laboratory-sized closed ecological system, the Laboratory Biosphere, in operation as of March 2002, and for the design of a Mars on Earth(TM) prototype life support system for manned missions to Mars and Mars surface habitats. Biosphere 2 is an important foundation for future advances in biospherics and closed ecological system research.     

Development and research program for a soil-based bioregenerative agriculture system to feed a four person crew at a Mars base.

For humans to survive during long-term missions on the Martian surface, bioregenerative life support systems including food production will decrease requirements for launch of Earth supplies, and increase mission safety. It is proposed that the development of "modular biospheres"--closed system units that can be air-locked together and which contain soil-based bioregenerative agriculture, horticulture, with a wetland wastewater treatment system is an approach for Mars habitation scenarios. Based on previous work done in long-term life support at Biosphere 2 and other closed ecological systems, this consortium proposes a research and development program called Mars On Earth(TM) which will simulate a life support system designed for a four person crew. The structure will consist of 6 x 110 square meter modular agricultural units designed to produce a nutritionally adequate diet for 4 people, recycling all air, water and waste, while utilizing a soil created by the organic enrichment and modification of Mars simulant soils. Further research needs are discussed, such as determining optimal light levels for growth of the necessary range of crops, energy trade-offs for agriculture (e.g. light intensity vs. required area), capabilities of Martian soils and their need for enrichment and elimination of oxides, strategies for use of human waste products, and maintaining atmospheric balance between people, plants and soils.     

Biosphere 2: a prototype project for a permanent and evolving life system for Mars base.

As part of the ground-based preparation for creating long-term life systems needed for space habitation and settlement, Space Biospheres Ventures (SBV) is undertaking the Biosphere 2 project near Oracle, Arizona. Biosphere 2, currently under construction, is scheduled to commence its operations in 1991 with a two-year closure period with a crew of eight people. Biosphere 2 is a facility which will be essentialy materially-closed to exchange with the outside environment. It is open to information and energy flow. Biosphere 2 is designed to achieve a complex life-support system by the integration of seven areas or "biomes"--rainforest, savannah, desert, marsh, ocean, intensive agriculture and human habitat. Unique bioregenerative technologies, such as soil bed reactors for air purification, aquatic waste processing systems, real-time analytic systems and complex computer monitoring and control systems are being developed for the Biosphere 2 project. Its operation should afford valuable insight into the functioning of complex life systems necessary for long-term habitation in space. It will serve as an experimental ground-based prototype and testbed for the stable, permanent life systems needed for human exploration of Mars.     

The water cycle in closed ecological systems: Perspectives from the Biosphere 2 and Laboratory Biosphere systems

To achieve sustainable, healthy closed ecological systems requires solutions to challenges of closing the water cycle – recycling wastewater/irrigation water/soil medium leachate and evaporated water and supplying water of required quality as needed for different needs within the facility. Engineering Biosphere 2, the first multi-biome closed ecological system within a total airtight footprint of 12,700 m² with a combined volume of 200,000 m³ with a total water capacity of some 6 × 10⁶ L of water was especially challenging because it included human inhabitants, their agricultural and technical systems, as well as five analogue ecosystems ranging from rainforest to desert, freshwater ecologies to saltwater systems like mangrove and mini-ocean coral reef ecosystems. By contrast, the Laboratory Biosphere – a small (40 m³ volume) soil-based plant growth facility with a footprint of 15 m² – is a very simplified system, but with similar challenges re salinity management and provision of water quality suitable for plant growth. In Biosphere 2, water needs included supplying potable water for people and domestic animals, irrigation water for a wide variety of food crops, and recycling and recovering soil nutrients from wastewater. In the wilderness biomes, providing adequately low salinity freshwater terrestrial ecosystems and maintaining appropriate salinity and pH in aquatic/marine ecosystems were challenges. The largest reservoirs in Biosphere 2 were the ocean/marsh with some 4 × 10⁶ L, soil with 1 to 2 × 10⁶ l, primary storage tank with 0 to 8 × 10⁵ L and storage tanks for condensate and soil leachate collection and mixing tanks with a capacity of 1.6 × 10⁵ L to supply irrigation for farm and wilderness ecosystems. Other reservoirs were far smaller – humidity in the atmosphere (2 × 10³ L), streams in the rainforest and savannah, and seasonal pools in the desert were orders of magnitude smaller (8 × 10⁴ L). Key technologies included condensation from humidity in the air handlers and from the glass space frame to produce high quality freshwater, wastewater treatment with constructed wetlands and desalination through reverse osmosis and flash evaporation were key to recycling water with appropriate quality throughout the Biosphere 2 facility. Wastewater from all human uses and the domestic animals in Biosphere 2 was treated and recycled through a series of constructed wetlands, which had hydraulic loading of 0.9–1.1 m³ day⁻¹ (240–290 gal d⁻¹). Plant production in the wetland treatment system produced 1210 kg dry weight of emergent and floating aquatic plant wetland which was used as fodder for the domestic animals while remaining nutrients/water was reused as part of the agricultural irrigation supply. There were pools of water with recycling times of days to weeks and others with far longer cycling times within Biosphere 2. By contrast, the Laboratory Biosphere with a total water reservoir of less than 500 L has far quicker cycling rapidity: for example, atmospheric residence time for water vapor was 5–20 min in the Laboratory Biosphere vs. 1–4 h in Biosphere 2, as compared with 9 days in the Earth’s biosphere. Just as in Biosphere 2, humidity in the Laboratory Biosphere amounts to a very small reservoir of water. The amount of water passing through the air in the course of a 12-h operational day is two orders of magnitude greater than the amount stored in the air. Thus, evaporation and condensation collection are vital parts of the recycle system just as in Biosphere 2. The water cycle and sustainable water recycling in closed ecological systems presents problems requiring further research – such as how to control buildup of salinity in materially closed ecosystems and effective ways to retain nutrients in optimal quantity and useable form for plant growth. These issues are common to all closed ecological systems of whatever size, including planet Earth’s biosphere and are relevant to a global environment facing increasing water shortages while maintaining water quality for human and ecosystem health. Modular biospheres offer a test bed where technical methods of resolving these problems can be tested for feasibility.     

“Modular Biospheres” – New testbed platforms for public environmental education and research

This paper will review the potential of a relatively new type of testbed platform for environmental education and research because of the unique advantages resulting from their material closure and separation from the outside environment. These facilities which we term “modular biospheres”, have emerged from research centered on space life support research but offer a wider range of application. Examples of this type of facility include the Bios-3 facility in Russia, the Japanese CEEF (Closed Ecological Experiment Facility), the NASA Kennedy Space Center Breadboard facility, the Biosphere 2 Test Module and the Laboratory Biosphere. Modular biosphere facilities offer unique research and public real-time science education opportunities. Ecosystem behavior can be studied since initial state conditions can be precisely specified and tracked over different ranges of time. With material closure (apart from very small air exchange rate which can be determined), biogeochemical cycles between soil and soil microorganisms, water, plants, and atmosphere can be studied in detail. Such studies offer a major advance from studies conducted with phytotrons which because of their small size, limit the number of organisms to a very small number, and which crucially do not have a high degree of atmospheric, water and overall material closure. Modular biospheres take advantage of the unique properties of closure, as representing a distinct system “metabolism” and therefore are essentially a “mini-world”. Though relatively large in comparison with most phytotrons and ecological microcosms, which are now standard research and educational tools, modular biospheres are small enough that they can be economically reconfigured to reflect a changing research agenda. Some design elements include lighting via electric lights and/or sunlight, hydroponic or soil substrate for plants, opaque or glazed structures, and variable volume chambers or other methods to handle atmospheric pressure differences between the facility and the outside environment.     

The importance of restoration of the atmospheric electrical environment in closed Bioregenerative Life Supporting Systems.

Earth based Bioregenerative Life Supporting Systems (BLSS) are subject to 4 main physical factors: gravity, light, temperature and electrical environment. The first 3 are obvious to everyone, the Electrical Environment (EE) is not under the majority of prevailing conditions perceived directly by our senses. The EE is one of the important physical factors directly influencing some plants and in a less obvious way also the majority of plants. There are only two long range forces in nature: the electromagnetic and the gravitational forces. Gravity is very much weaker than the electromagnetic forces FG/FEL=10(-38), where FG is the gravitational Force and FEL are the electromagnetic Forces. The atmospheric electric field prevails all the time over the entire Earth with a mean intensity of 130 V/m. It is therefore a potent factor which may be used by some plants exposed throughout their entire life time to the atmospheric electric field. What effect should the normal atmospheric electric field have on plants? All living plants are good electrical conductors for electrostatic fields. The plants distort the normally vertical field lines, which have to be perpendicular to the plant tissue everywhere in order to avoid the extraction of energy from the field. The meristems concentrate the field lines, thus the electrically charged nutrients are supplied to the growing parts of the plant exposed to the field. This results in electrotropism in some plants. It is very well known that plants do have adaptive capabilities as compared to animals, it is important for their survival, because they cannot run away from trouble. It is found by careful observations of the behaviour of different plants that some plants do respond to the presence of the atmospheric electric field while other plants exposed to the same environment are indifferent to the atmospheric electric field. The plants growing in the Biosphere II were shielded by the metal structure of the Biosphere II. Because these plants which do make use of the atmospheric electric field are also to be found in the Biosphere II and must be deprived of this natural atmospheric electric field and in consequence of some of their natural nutrients. I have experimental evidence that at least some plants do respond to the atmospheric electric field. This effect is the most likely cause of the oxygen depletion and of the carbon dioxide accumulation in Biosphere II. Under the micro gravity encountered in space habitats the restoration of electric fields is even more important for plant growth than it is on the Earth.     

Biosphere 2 Test Module: a ground-based sunlight-driven prototype of a closed ecological life support system.

Constructed in 1986, the Biosphere 2 Test Module has been used since the end of that year for closed ecological systems experiments. It is the largest closed ecological facility ever built, with a sealed variable volume of some 480 cubic meters. It is built with a skin of steel spaceframes with double-laminated glass panels admitting about 65 percent Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR). The floor is of welded steel and there is an underground atmospheric connection via an air duct to a variable volume chamber ("lung") permitting expansion and contraction of the Test Module's air volume caused by changes in temperature and barometric pressure, which causes a slight positive pressure from inside the closed system to the outside thereby insuring that the very small leakage rate is outward. Several series of closed ecological system investigations have been carried out in this facility. One series of experiments investigated the dynamics of higher plants and associated soils with the atmosphere under varying light and temperature conditions. Another series of experiments included one human in the closed system for three, five and twenty-one days. During these experiments the Test Module had subsystems which completely recycled its water and atmosphere; all the human dietary needs were produced within the facility, and all wastes were recycled using a marsh plant/microbe system. Other experiments have examined the capability of individual component systems used, such as the soil bed reactors, to eliminate experimentally introduced trace gases. Analytic systems developed for these experiments include continuous monitors of eleven atmospheric gases in addition to the complete gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GCMS) examinations of potable, waste system and irrigation water quality.     

Integration of lessons from recent research for “Earth to Mars” life support systems

Development of reliable and robust strategies for long-term life support for planetary exploration must be built from real-time experimentation to verify and improve system components. Also critical is incorporating a range of viable options to handle potential short-term life system imbalances. This paper revisits some of the conceptual framework for a Mars base prototype which has been developed by the authors along with others previously advanced (“Mars on Earth^®”) in the light of three years of experimentation in the Laboratory Biosphere, further investigation of system alternatives and the advent of other innovative engineering and agri-ecosystem approaches. Several experiments with candidate space agriculture crops have demonstrated the higher productivity possible with elevated light levels and improved environmental controls. For example, crops of sweet potatoes exceeded original Mars base prototype projections by an average of 46% (53% for best crop) ultradwarf (Apogee) wheat by 9% (23% for best crop), pinto bean by 13% (31% for best crop). These production levels, although they may be increased with further optimization of lighting regimes, environmental parameters, crop density etc. offer evidence that a soil-based system can be as productive as the hydroponic systems which have dominated space life support scenarios and research. But soil also offers distinct advantages: the capability to be created on the Moon or Mars using in situ space resources, reduces long-term reliance on consumables and imported resources, and more readily recycling and incorporating crew and crop waste products. In addition, a living soil contains a complex microbial ecosystem which helps prevent the buildup of trace gases or compounds, and thus assist with air and water purification. The atmospheric dynamics of these crops were studied in the Laboratory Biosphere adding to the database necessary for managing the mixed stands of crops essential for supplying a nutritionally adequate diet in space. This paper explores some of the challenges of small bioregenerative life support: air-sealing and facility architecture/design, balance of short-term variations of carbon dioxide and oxygen through staggered plantings, options for additional atmospheric buffers and sinks, lighting/energy efficiency engineering, crop and waste product recycling approaches, and human factor considerations in the design and operation of a Mars base. An “Earth to Mars” project, forging the ability to live sustainably in space (as on Earth) requires continued research and testing of these components and integrated subsystems; and developing a step-by-step learning process.     

Farming in space: environmental and biophysical concerns.

The colonization of space will depend on our ability to routinely provide for the metabolic needs (oxygen, water, and food) of a crew with minimal re-supply from Earth. On Earth, these functions are facilitated by the cultivation of plant crops, thus it is important to develop plant-based food production systems to sustain the presence of mankind in space. Farming practices on earth have evolved for thousands of years to meet both the demands of an ever-increasing population and the availability of scarce resources, and now these practices must adapt to accommodate the effects of global warming. Similar challenges are expected when earth-based agricultural practices are adapted for space-based agriculture. A key variable in space is gravity; planets (e.g. Mars, 1/3 g) and moons (e.g. Earth's moon, 1/6 g) differ from spacecraft orbiting the Earth (e.g. Space stations) or orbital transfer vehicles that are subject to microgravity. The movement of heat, water vapor, CO2 and O2 between plant surfaces and their environment is also affected by gravity. In microgravity, these processes may also be affected by reduced mass transport and thicker boundary layers around plant organs caused by the absence of buoyancy dependent convective transport. Future space farmers will have to adapt their practices to accommodate microgravity, high and low extremes in ambient temperatures, reduced atmospheric pressures, atmospheres containing high volatile organic carbon contents, and elevated to super-elevated CO2 concentrations. Farming in space must also be carried out within power-, volume-, and mass-limited life support systems and must share resources with manned crews. Improved lighting and sensor technologies will have to be developed and tested for use in space. These developments should also help make crop production in terrestrial controlled environments (plant growth chambers and greenhouses) more efficient and, therefore, make these alternative agricultural systems more economically feasible food production systems.     

Atmospheric dynamics in the "Laboratory Biosphere" with wheat and sweet potato crops.

Laboratory Biosphere is a 40-m3 closed life system equipped with 12,000 W of high pressure sodium lamps over planting beds with 5.37 m2 of soil. Atmospheric composition changes due to photosynthetic fixation of carbon dioxide and corresponding production of oxygen or the reverse, respiration, are observed in short timeframes, e.g., hourly. To focus on inherent characteristics of the crop as distinct from its area or the volume of the chamber, we report fixation and respiration rates in mmol h-1 m-2 of planted area. An 85-day crop of USU Apogee wheat under a 16-h lighted/8-h dark regime peaked in fixation rate at about 100 mmol h-1 m-2 approximately 24 days after planting. Light intensity was about 840 micromoles m-2 s-1. Dark respiration peaked at about 31 mmol h-1 m-2 at the same time. Thereafter, both fixation and respiration declined toward zero as harvest time approached. A residual soil respiration rate of about 1.9 mmol h-1 m-2 was observed in the dark closed chamber for 100 days after the harvest. A 126-day crop of Tuskegee TU-82-155 sweet potato behaved quite differently. Under a 680 micromoles m-2 s-1, 18-h lighted/6-h dark regime, fixation during lighted hours rose to a plateau ranging from about 27 to 48 mmol h-1 m-2 after 42 days and dark respiration settled into a range of 12-23 mmol h-1 m-2. These rates continued unabated until the harvest at 126 days, suggesting that tuber biomass production might have continued at about the same rate for some time beyond the harvest time that was exercised in this experiment. In both experiments CO2 levels were allowed to range widely from a few hundred to about 3000 ppm, which permitted observation of fixation rates both at varying CO2 concentrations and at each number of days after planting. This enables plotting the fixation rate as a function of both variables. Understanding the atmospheric dynamics of individual crops will be essential for design and atmospheric management of more complex CELSS which integrate the simultaneous growth of several crops as in a sustainable remote life support system.     

Food production and nutrition in Biosphere 2: results from the first mission September 1991 to September 1993.

The initial test of the Biosphere 2 agricultural system was to provide a nutritionally adequate diet for eight crew members during a two year closure experiment, 1991-1993. The overall results of that trial are presented in this paper. The 2000 m2 cropping area provided about 80 percent of overall nutritional needs during the two years. Adaptation of the crew to the diet which averaged 2200 calories, 73 g. of protein and 32 g. of fat per person over the course of the two years. The diet was primarily vegetarian, with only small amounts of milk, meat and eggs from the system's domestic animals. The crew experienced 10-20 percent weight loss, most of which occurred in the first six months of the closure reflecting adaptation to the diet and lower caloric intake during that period. Since Biosphere 2 is a tightly sealed system, non-toxic methods of pest and disease control were employed and inedible plant material, domestic animal wastes and human waste-water were processed and nutrients returned to the soil. Crop pests and diseases, especially broad mites and rootknot nematode, reduced yields, and forced the use of alternative crops. Outstanding crops included rice, sweet potato, beets, banana, and papaya. The African pygmy goats were the most productive of the domestic animals. Overall, the agriculture and food processing required some 45% of the crew time.     

Methods for measurement and control of leakage in CELSS and their application and performance in the Biosphere 2 facility.

Atmospheric leakage between a CELSS and its surround is driven by the differential pressure between the two. In an earth-based CELSS, both negative and positive differential pressures of atmosphere are created as the resultant of three influences: thermal expansion/contraction, transition of water between liquid and vapor phases, and external barometric pressure variations. The resultant may typically be on the order of 5000 pascals. By providing a flexible expansion chamber, the differential pressure range can be reduced two, or even three, orders of magnitude, which correspondingly reduces the leakage. The expansion chamber itself can also be used to measure the leak rate. Independent confirmation is possible by measurement of the progressive dilution of a trace gas. These methods as employed at the Biosphere 2 facility have resulted in an estimated atmospheric leak rate of less than 10 percent per year.     

Suggestions for crops grown in controlled ecological life-support systems, based on attractive vegetarian diets.

Assuming that crops grown in controlled ecological life-support systems (CELSS) should provide a basis for meals that are both nutritious and attractive (to taste and vision), and that CELSS diets on the moon or Mars or in space-craft during long voyages will have to be mostly vegetarian, a workshop was convened at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, U.S.A. on 19 to 21 January, 1994. Participants consisted of trained nutritionists and others; many of the approximately 18 presenters who discussed possible diets were practicing vegetarians, some for more than two decades. Considering all the presentations, seven conclusions (or points for discussion) could be formulated: nutritious vegetarian diets are relatively easily to formulate, vegetarian diets are healthy, variety is essential in vegetarian diets, some experiences (e.g., Bios-3 and Biosphere 2) are relevant to planning of CELSS diets, physical constraints will limit the choice of crops, a preliminary list of recommended crops can be formulated, and this line of research has some potential practical spinoffs. The list of crops and the reasons for including specific crops might be of interest to professionals in the field of health and nutrition as well as to those who are designing closed ecological systems.     

Tightly closed ecological systems reveal atmospheric subtleties – experience from Biosphere 2

Processes which produce slow changes in air composition in a closed ecological system (CES) may not be noticed if the leak rate of the CES is significant. Dilution of the system’s air with outside air can mask these processes. A tightly closed CES provides the opportunity for slow changes to accumulate over time and be observed and measured. Biosphere 2 (volume 200,000 m³) had a low leak rate of less than 10 percent per year. Oxygen declined slowly at varying rates reflecting seasonal influences, which averaged to about 140 ppm per day during the first 16 months of the two-year closure. Computer simulations of the observed rate of oxygen loss combined with other hypothetical leak rates suggest that the decline would have been hidden by a leak rate as low as one percent per day. Sealing Biosphere 2 involved rigorous design specifications and inclusion of two expansion chambers (called “lungs”) to accommodate expansion/contraction of the atmosphere, which enabled limiting the pressure difference between inside and outside atmospheres to the range of ±8 Pa (0.08 mBar). Measurement of leak rate was by two methods: the first, measuring the rate of deflation of the lungs while holding a constant elevated pressure differential enabled calculation of an estimated leak rate within the usual operating pressure differential range; the second was to measure the progressive dilution of trace gases spiked into the atmosphere. Both methods confirmed leakage to be less than 10 percent per year. Operational data from the 40 m³ Laboratory Biosphere is used to illustrate how normal variations of temperature, humidity and barometric pressure would combine to force leakage and rapidly dilute the internal atmosphere if it were not equipped with a lung. It is demonstrated that very high degrees of closure for a CES enable experimental observation of small imbalances in atmospheric cycles or slow accumulation of trace gases that could otherwise be masked by dilution with atmosphere external to the CES.     

Technical review of the Laboratory Biosphere closed ecological system facility.

Laboratory Biosphere is a 40 m3 closed life system that commenced operation in May 2002. Light is from 12,000 W of high pressure sodium lamps over planting beds with 5.37 m2 of soil. Water is 100% recycled by collecting condensate from the temperature and humidity control system and mixing with leachate collected from under the planting beds. Atmospheric leakage was estimated during the first closure experiment to be 0.5-1% per day in general plus about 1% for each usage of the airlock door. The first trial run of 94 days was with a soybean crop grown from seeds (May 17, 2002) to harvest (August 14, 2002) plus 5 days of post-harvest closure. The focus of this initial trial was system testing to confirm functionality and identify any necessary modifications or improvements. This paper describes the organizational and physical features of the Laboratory Biosphere.     

Initial experimental results from the Laboratory Biosphere closed ecological system facility.

An initial experiment in the Laboratory Biosphere facility, Santa Fe, New Mexico, was conducted May-August 2002 using a soil-based system with light levels (at 12 h per day) of 58-mol m-2 d-1. The crop tested was soybean, cultivar Hoyt, which produced an aboveground biomass of 2510 grams. Dynamics of a number of trace gases showed that methane, nitrous oxide, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen gas had initial increases that were substantially reduced in concentration by the end of the experiment. Methane was reduced from 209 ppm to 11 ppm, and nitrous oxide from 5 ppm to 1.4 ppm in the last 40 days of the closure experiment. Ethylene was at elevated levels compared to ambient during the flowering/fruiting phase of the crop. Soil respiration from the 5.37 m2 (1.46 m3) soil component was estimated at 23.4 ppm h-1 or 1.28 g CO2 h-1 or 5.7 g CO2 m-2 d-1. Phytorespiration peaked near the time of fruiting at about 160 ppm h-1. At the height of plant growth, photosynthesis CO2 draw down was as high as 3950 ppm d-1, and averaged 265 ppm h-1 (whole day averages) during lighted hours with a range of 156-390 ppm h-1. During this period, the chamber required injections of CO2 to continue plant growth. Oxygen levels rose along with the injections of carbon dioxide. Upon several occasions, CO2 was allowed to be drawn down to severely limiting levels, bottoming at around 150 ppm. A strong positive correlation (about 0.05 ppm h-1 ppm-1 with r2 about 0.9 for the range 1000-5000 ppm) was observed between atmospheric CO2 concentration and the rate of fixation up to concentrations of around 8800 ppm CO2.     

Key ecological challenges for closed systems facilities

Closed ecological systems are desirable for a number of purposes. In space life support systems, material closure allows precious life-supporting resources to be kept inside and recycled. Closure in small biospheric systems facilitates detailed measurement of global ecological processes and biogeochemical cycles. Closed testbeds facilitate research topics which require isolation from the outside (e.g. genetically modified organisms; radioisotopes) so their ecological interactions and fluxes can be studied separate from interactions with the outside environment. But to achieve and maintain closure entails solving complex ecological challenges. These challenges include being able to handle faster cycling rates and accentuated daily and seasonal fluxes of critical life elements such as carbon dioxide, oxygen, water, macro- and mico-nutrients. The problems of achieving sustainability in closed systems for life support include how to handle atmospheric dynamics including trace gases, producing a complete human diet, recycling nutrients and maintaining soil fertility, the maintenance of healthy air and water and preventing the loss of critical elements from active circulation. In biospheric facilities, the challenge is also to produce analogues to natural biomes and ecosystems, studying processes of self-organization and adaptation in systems that allow specification or determination of state variables and cycles which may be followed through all interactions from atmosphere to soils. Other challenges include the dynamics and genetics of small populations, the psychological challenges for small isolated human groups and backup technologies and strategic options which may be necessary to ensure long-term operation of closed ecological systems.     

“Biospherics” approach for studies of natural and artificial ecosystems

The main unifying feature of natural and artificial ecosystems is their biotic turnover (cycling) of substances which is induced with energy fluxes. A new integrating scientific discipline – Biospherics – studies biotic cycles (both in experiments and in mathematical models) of different degree of closure and complexity. By its origin, Biospherics is to be connected with extensive studies of Biosphere by Russian academician Vladimir Vernadsky. He developed and used “empirical generalizations” based on innumerous observations, comparisons and reflections. His “bio-geo-chemical principles” of Biosphere and ecosystems development have more qualitative than quantitative nature. Quantitative criteria to evaluate the efficiency of natural and artificial ecosystems are to take into account energy fluxes and their use in ecosystems of different types. At least, three of them are of value for estimation of natural and artificial ecosystems’ functional activities. Energy principle of extensive development (EPED), energy principle of intensive development (EPID) and main universal (generalized) criterion (MUC). The last criterion (Principle) characterizes the specific cycling rate of limiting chemical elements in multi-organism systems, developing under external energy fluxes. Its value can be a quantitative measure of effectiveness for every ecosystem functioning, including our global Biosphere. Different examples of these (above-mentioned) integrated criteria actions are presented and analyzed in the paper.     

Advantages of using subsurface flow constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in space applications: ground-based Mars Base prototype.

Research and design of subsurface flow wetland wastewater treatment systems for a ground-based experimental prototype Mars Base facility has been carried out, using a subsurface flow approach. These systems have distinct advantages in planetary exploration scenarios: they are odorless, relatively low-labor and low-energy, assist in purification of water and recycling of atmospheric CO2, and will support some food crops. An area of 6-8 m2 may be sufficient for integration of wetland wastewater treatment with a prototype Mars Base supporting 4-5 people. Discharge water from the wetland system will be used as irrigation water for the agricultural crop area, thus ensuring complete recycling and utilization of nutrients. Since the primary requirements for wetland treatment systems are warm temperatures and lighting, such bioregenerative systems may be integrated into early Mars base habitats, since waste heat from the lights may be used for temperature maintenance in the human living environment. "Wastewater gardens (TM)" can be modified for space habitats to lower space and mass requirements. Many of its construction requirements can eventually be met with use of in-situ materials, such as gravel from the Mars surface. Because the technology requires little machinery and no chemicals, and relies more on natural ecological mechanisms (microbial and plant metabolism), maintenance requirements are minimized, and systems can be expected to have long operating lifetimes. Research needs include suitability of Martian soil and gravel for wetland systems, system sealing and liner options in a Mars Base, and wetland water quality efficiency under varying temperature and light regimes.